Palestine, and the crime of being a Jewish state

"Livni made that quite clear in that press conference with the French FM that you spoke so highly of." Livni said no such thing, and I don't think that I "spoke highly" of anything. I simply pointed out that you attributed things to her that she did not say. And you continue to do so. She certainly did not say that they don't have a right to self-determination, or that they don't have a say in "defining themselves". (And I'm not sure why they would have a role in JEWISH self-determination.) She also did not say that they don't have national rights, nor did she say that they don't have a stake in the State of Israel.

The "good justice" Agranat did not specify that to be an Israeli one had to belong to the Jewish nation (or people). He stated the opposite: That being Israeli did not negate a Jew's affiliation (le'om) with the Jewish people (am yisrael) in the diaspora.

"It is a travel document, JES, and the only difference between it and a laissez-passer is that one is issued by a nation-state and one is not." Not at all. Lebanon, Iraq, Egypt and other Arab states all issue separate Palestinian Travel Documents to Palestinians, whill issuing Passports to their nationals, precisely because the Palestinians do not have Lebanese, Iraqi or Egyptian NATIONALITY. Jordan similarly does so to those Palestinians who refused to accept Jordanian nationality, becuase in doing so they would have negated their refugee status.

Full of such self-centred narrowmindedness... JES: "It strikes me as interesting that, not only do you have the temerity to tell another people how they should define themselves" Such A Laugh! One of the points I am trying to make is that the zionist regime in charge of the State of Israel is DENYING that the Israeli Arab citizens have any say at all in "defining themselves", because they have NO ROLE AT ALL in any national self-determination by the people of Israel, because they are not stakeholders in this State. Only the Jews are; the rest simply live there, and enjoy CIVIL rights, not NATIONAL rights. Livni made that quite clear in that press conference with the French FM that you spoke so highly of. Livni: you can take the politician out of Likud, but you can't take Likud out of the politician.

JES: "Jewish ETHNIC affiliation exists in the Law of Return, and a Jew who requests Israeli nationality under this law retains his or her Jewish ETHNICITY" Tamarin vs the State of Israel 1972 Justice Agranat: "there is no Israeli nation separate from the Jewish nation" ... "composed not only of those residing in Israel but also of Diaspora Jewry." The Jewish Nation exists, and it comprises both Israeli Jews and Diaspora Jews, and it and the Israeli nation are One and Indivisible, and this was settled by THE HIGHEST COURT IN YOUR LAND AS FAR BACK AS 1972. And why did the good Justice decide that to be an "Israeli" one had to belong to the "Jewish nation", even when that Jewish nation exists both inside and outside the State? Because to find otherwise "would negate the very foundation upon which the State of Israel was formed" I will note that Uzi Ornan is now attempting to overturn this rather, ahem, quaint notion in the IHCJ, and has been stonewalled by the court.

JES: "Abbas (or another Palestinian refugee) will most likely travel with some form of temporary travel document, similar to a laissez-passer, issued either by a state who agrees to take responsibility for him or by an international institution, such as the UN or Arab League. He will not have a regular passport of a nation-state, because he does not have status as a national (i.e. nationality) of any nation-state." Soooooo, a laissez-passer is a travel document, and acts in the same manner as a passport from a nation-state i.e. as a travel document. Soooooo, in what way isn't a passport a travel document, and in what way is it a "proof of nationality" rather than, you know, a travel document? It is a travel document, JES, and the only difference between it and a laissez-passer is that one is issued by a nation-state and one is not.

What I find puzzling is your insistence on the literal meaning of Farsi (a language that you do not speak) in a statement by Ahmedinejad, while at the same time ignoring the meaning of Hebrew (a language that you also don?t speak) when it comes to Israeli law. Jewish ETHNIC affiliation exists in the Law of Return, and a Jew who requests Israeli nationality under this law retains his or her Jewish ETHNICITY. Ahmed Tibi may consider himself ethnically Palestinian, and his Israeli nationality does not negate this. Recognizing ethnic affiliation is the norm in today?s multicultural societies. There is no ?American ethnicity?, and I doubt that there is an Australian one either. This is the reason that the Palestinian Basic Law can state that the ?Palestinian people are part of the Arab nation?, or - to paraphrase Agranat - that there is no Palestinian nation separate from the Arab nation. It strikes me as interesting that, not only do you have the temerity to tell another people how they should define themselves, and make unfounded claims about ?theocracy?, but that you should also have no qualms about trying to dictate the meaning of terms in our language.

JES: "There is no point in explaining to you again that le'om does not refer to nationality - particularly not in the sense that we are discussing." George Tamarin vs the State of Israel 1972 Tamarin wished to have his nationality acknowledged by the State as "Israeli", not "Jewish nationality" He lost. The court decided that in ISRAELI LAW there is no such thing as an "Israeli nationality" High Court Justice Shimon Agranat: "there is no Israeli nation separate from the Jewish nation" ... "composed not only of those residing in Israel but also of Diaspora Jewry." JEWISH NATIONALITY exists in Israeli law, JES, and it includes DISAPORA JEWS. On assumption of Israeli Citizenship that Jew retains their JEWISH NATIONALITY - they do not gain an ISRAELI NATIONALITY. Why? So that preferential treatment can be given to "Israeli citizens with Jewish nationality".

Well sorry about that. Again, I see you rely on your friends at Nord-Sud XXI and Qumsiyeh. And again, you insist that the world conform to your terms in English. There is no point in explaining to you again that le'om does not refer to nationality ? particularly not in the sense that we are discussing. Further, recognition of a Jewish nation does not make Israel "theocratic" as Qumsiyeh, Nord-Sud XXI and you try to assert. More important, however, is that you proved my point with your initial statement: "A passport is merely travel documentation; Abbas will have a 'nationality' stamped on his passport, yet he belongs to no 'nation-state'." Quite wrong. Abbas (or another Palestinian refugee) will most likely travel with some form of temporary travel document, similar to a laissez-passer, issued either by a state who agrees to take responsibility for him or by an international institution, such as the UN or Arab League. He will not have a regular passport of a nation-state, because he does not have status as a national (i.e. nationality) of any nation-state.

JES: "In most 'Western nation-states' nationality is indicated by the issuance of a passport specifying that the bearer is a 'national' of that state." A passport is merely travel documentation; Abbas will have a "nationality" stamped on his passport, yet he belongs to no "nation-state". JES: "The fact that there is a classification of 'ethnicity' or 'ethnic affiliation' (which is not listed in the passport) does not negate this." There are 137 "nationalities" that are recognized ADMINISTRATIVELY inside Israel, and only *one* of them is exists in ISRAELI LAW: "Jewish nationality". This was tested in 1971; George Tamarin vs the State of Israel. The ruling?: "there is no Israeli nation separate from the Jewish nation" ... "composed not only of those residing in Israel but also of Diaspora Jewry." The reason?: Recognizing in LAW an Israeli nationality would "negate the very foundation upon which the State of Israel was formed".

JES: "Those arriving in Israel with another citizenship (nationality) are granted an A1 visa, which is a temporary residence visa that does not grant citizenship." I asked my local experts: http://www.jewishaustralia.com/israel-visa.htm "For those contemplating Aliyah but wishing to experience life in Israel before deciding if to formalize the move, a temporary resident visa, known as an A1 visa, is available." "The A1 visa is available only to individuals who are eligible for Aliyah under the Law of Return, and the qualifications for the visa are basically identical to those of an Aliyah application, namely ? proof of Jewishness and presentation of a foreign passport." This is a visa given to Jews who GO TO LIVE IN ISRAEL BUT DO NOT WANT TO "RETURN" - useful if you are seconded to the Israeli branch office of your company, I imagine - but NOBODY undertaking Aliyah gets one, regardless of their foreign nationality. Yur lying, JES.

You seem not to know what the laws of extradition are, or how they work. If I have time one day, I shall post the details. ?CJK Dear Cipora, You are consistent. You continuously miss the point. I do understand how the extradiction laws work. Israel signed an extradition treaty and the Knesset promptly gutted it. However, the decision of the Israeli Supreme Court was clearly racists. And the Knesset can enact any law that it desires. But, hey, as long as you say you are our friend, what the heck, its OK. Since the US has asked for extradition, and since the crimes were committed in the US, I hope that he will be extradited. ? CJK You clearly miss my point. I was not discussing the law, but of my opinion and wish. Israel is a state for the Jews as you so vehemently argue. He is a Jew. I agree. Here is another one. My wish is that you keep him. He belongs there more than here. He is not the only pedophile to seek refuge in Israel. As the Supreme Court Justice stated; it is not a matter of right or wrong but whether Israel will be a haven for Jews; To date Israel has harbored many Jewish fugitives, not just from America, and not just pedophiles, but other countries as well. The Shulchan Aruch (ChM 388,9) rules: "It is prohibited to deliver a Jew, both his person and his property, into the hands of non-Jews, even if he was wicked and a criminal." This provides the moral basis for many of the inconstancies that undermine the arguments that you and many others make here. Good starting point for the discussion of racism isn?t it?

You seem not to know what the laws of extradition are, or how they work. If I have time one day, I shall post the details. Since the US has asked for extradition, and since the crimes were committed in the US, I hope that he will be extradited and sent to prison for the rest of his life. I have a particular loathing for pedophiles, and in this case the crimes, if proven, were multiple.

It is the US who is asking for extradition.-CJK Yes, America usually does that because of our regard for the rule of law. However, since Israel has a history of not extraditing fugitives, my response was pragmatic and more appropriate in the interest of justice. 1. If Israel keeps him America doesn?t have to pay to house him and provide special meals. 2. Since the Israeli Supreme Court holds a Jew to be above the laws of a foreign country. I think that justice would be served by allowing him to remain in Israel. He is removed from our society. How you do or do not deal with him is then irrelevant. He?s yours, keep him.

"Do you mean that the Jews are not doing as well now as they did prewar?" (ANY) YES! But pre-1930`s, not "pre"war. Everyone in my country of birth, and Germany too! Science, literature, music, everything was flowering there. My father studied at Charlottenburg (Berlin). My mother in Vienna. Vacations in Marienbad and Italy. Thomas Mann, Einstein, etc, etc. Jewish Germans considered themselves GERMANS! You think there is anything like that now? Only France has a considerable no. of Jews left and they are increasingly afraid of the aggresions of Moslems. Same everywhere else. Holland. Actually, I was aware of the richness of the Jewish population in Europe, and their loyalty to their respective country of birth. But, they were somewhat limited in choice, as Israel at that time did not exist. I don?t think that anyone except Hitler?s Germany did not see their Jewish citizens as loyal. I had had forgotten the period pre 1930, and situation you describe. My mistake. Germany and Europe lost enormously in that regard. But it is also because of the richness of the period you describe that I do not view Germany thru the eyes of the Nazi period. Obviously the Jewish German population is smaller and less wealthy today. But, I was of the opinion, that the Jewish populations now in Europe were well protected by specific laws and enjoyed the same access in society and equal economic participation as everyone else. In other words doing well. That this is not so is news to me. Regarding the Muslim population of France. I would guess that the French themselves are concerned about their Muslim population also. All of Europe will have serious problem with a transplanted Muslim population in a few decades. It has frightful implications for Israel as well.

It was given several times in Haaretz, every time increasing the sum. The latest, I am enormously ashamed to say, over $1 million per family-S There are some issues that I consider internal Israeli affairs that I do not follow or comment on. However, for the same amount of money, there are many worthwhile things that it could be spent on, that would be more beneficial to Israel and the ME. Maybe you could have bought off the Palestinians by giving each of them a camel to ride out of town on. But coming back to the $1 million, that is stupidity beyond belief and obscene, when compared to what any sane person would see as more pressing needs by Israel. It is comforting that we are not the only ones with stupid politicians. If that is correct, than the money would have been wasted" (ANY) Were/are you that naive? I knew that in 1980!-S Yes I was at that time. But, I would call it ignorance as opposed to naïve. Do I detect a bit of smugness on your part that I am ignorant? I, like most Americans were/are ignorant of a lot of what Israel does. There are no newspapers here that provide coverage of Israel, in an open way like Haaretz does. Certainly not the broadcast media. This is why I started reading Haaretz.

And while we're being precise in our meanings, what you have described - even if you had all your facts straight - in no way defines a "theocracy" or a "theocratic state". There is no issue of divine authority and, as I have pointed out, even the Law of Return makes clear distinctions between ethnic affiliation (le'om) and religion (dat). Iran would be an example of a theocracy, because the ultimate power of the regime is held by those to whom divine right or inspiration is attributed (ayatollah in Arabic means "word of God", i.e. the ayatollahs are believed to speak from divine inspiration granted directly by allah).

First of all, under the Law of Return, the Minister of the Interior specifically may not grant a VISA under the three conditions mentioned ? not citizenship. If you don?t believe that, check out what happened, for example, with Mayer Lansky. Further, the Law of Return explicitly distinguishes ?ethnicity? from ?religion?, granting oleh status to those who are defined as Jews by ethnicity, not in terms of religion (including non-Jewish spouses). This is similar to special privileges in other ?Western nation-states? for those who share the majority ethnicity. Those arriving in Israel with another citizenship (nationality) are granted an A1 visa, which is a temporary residence visa that does not grant citizenship. JB: ?What we are arguing over is wether Israeli Law recognizes ?Israeli nationality?.? In most ?Western nation-states? nationality is indicated by the issuance of a passport specifying that the bearer is a ?national? of that state. This is the case in Israel. The fact that there is a classification of ?ethnicity? or ?ethnic affiliation? (which is not listed in the passport) does not negate this. Finally, no, we are not talking about ETYMOLOGY, we are talking about SEMANTICS, which is the case because you were the one who claimed (based on the erroneous article by Qumsiyeh) that Israel ?obfuscates? in translation. Semantics is critical here. We are also talking about the law, and I would point out that even the Australian Citizenship Act of 2007 tends to blur the distinction between ?nationality? and ?citizenship? and lists ?Nationality? on its passports (as Israel does), which appears to be the result of citizenship.

JES: "Who is a Palestinian by ethnic affiliation (le`om or qawimah)? What constitutes a Palestinian nationality?" In a theocratic state you have just asked the same question twice. In a "western-style nation-state" the answers are: 1) Any collective that decide that their ethnicity is "Palestinian" are entitled to call themselves "ethnic Palestinians", and the criteria they use to determine who "belongs" is of no concern to the State. 2) Palestinian nationality resides in all Palestinian citizens, regardless of their religion or ethnicity. I am talking about the Law, not the etymology of words, and in Israel the Law defines "nationality" in a way that a western Nation-State would consider as theocratic. That some future Palestinian state may ALSO create Laws that lead to a theocratic state is their choice, but I doubt they'd try to pretend it's anything other than a waddlin', quackin', and swimmin' little duckie. Unlike Israel, and you.

"the money paid to the Gaza settlers, is beyond any imagination!- S I can imagine, but have never seen any estimates of any kind." (ANY) It was given several times in Haaretz, every time increasing the sum. The latest, I am enormously ashamed to say, over $1 million per family. " If that is correct, than the money would have been wasted" (ANY) Were/are you that naive? I knew that in 1980! "Do you mean that the Jews are not doing as well now as they did prewar?" (ANY) YES! But pre-1930's, not "pre"war. Everyone in my country of birth, and Germany too! Science, literature, music, everything was flowering there. My father studied at Charlottenburg (Berlin). My mother in Vienna. Vacations in Marienbad and Italy. Thomas Mann, Einstein, etc, etc. Jewish Germans considered themselves GERMANS! You think there is anything like that now? Only France has a considerable no. of Jews left and they are increasingly afraid of the aggresions of Moslems. Same everywhere else. Holland...

JES: "So Johnbaby, if Jewish nationality (le`om) 'simply exists', how come it doesn't 'simply exist' in the three cases above?" Because what the Minister is denying them is Israeli citizenship not Jewish nationality. We both agree that every Israeli - Jew, Druze, Arab, Christian - is an Israeli citizen. What we are arguing over is wether Israeli Law recognizes "Israeli nationality". There definitely *is* a "Jewish nationality", and it is recognized in Israeli Law. If you have "Jewish nationality" then you can be given automatic Israeli citizenship, subject to a Ministerial power of veto. If you do not possess "Jewish nationality" then that route to citizenship is unavailable. Israeli Law also recognizes "Druze nationality" and "Arab nationality" It does not recognize "Israeli nationality", because the law wishes to discriminate and the State can't do so on the basis of CITIZENSHIP, so it does so on the basis of "NATIONALITY".

JES: "Israel only grants automatic citizenship to Jews who are stateless. Jews who are not 'stateless' (i.e. have citizenship from another country) go through a three-year period of temporary residence prior to being granted citizenship." I'm also looking here: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1950_1959/Law%20of%20Return%205710-1950 and I see no such restriction. I'm also looking here: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/State/Acquisition+of+Israeli+Nationality.htm and I see no such restriction. "Israeli citizenship becomes effective on the day of arrival in the country or of receipt of an oleh's certificate, whichever is later." Neither mention that someone with "Jewish nationality" need renounce their prior national identity prior to Aliyah; they need only have "expressed his desire to settle in Israel". He's not exactly burning his American or EU passport when he does that, is he?

It is the US who is asking for extradition. I would be satisfied with life in prison in either country.

Who is a Palestinian by ethnic affiliation (le'om or qawimah)? What constitutes a Palestinian nationality?

JES: "then a Jewish settler born in the West Banks should have Palestinian citizenship" Jewish settlers aew there because the occupying power has allowed them onto that land in violation of Int'l Law. That occupier has said that any pre-occupation legal regimes do not apply to that settler and, indeed, there is no authority other than that of that occupying power. A child born under those circumstances is an "Israeli", JES. And since this child will be Jewish their "Jewish nationality" will be recognized by the State of Israel. Even if there was a Palestinian state under IDF occupation (and there isn't) that child will be a citizen of the occupier, not the occupied. JES: "and a third-generation child of a Palestinian refugee born in Dearborn, Michigan should have to go through naturalization?" Then they are a citizen/national of the USA, and if Palestine were a western-style nation-state then they would have to be naturalized. Your point being...?

Are you talking about le'om or ezrahut (or whatever the Greek equivalents are)? Let me ask you this. The Law of Return states as follows: "An oleh's visa [note: visa, not nationality or citizenship] shall be granted to every Jew who has expressed his desire to settle in Israel, unless the Minister of Immigration is satisfied that the applicant (1) is engaged in an activity directed against the Jewish people; or (2) is likely to endanger public health or the security of the State. (3) is a person with a criminal past, likely to endanger public welfare." So Johnbaby, if Jewish nationality (le'om) "simply exists", how come it doesn't "simply exist" in the three cases above?

If you took the trouble to actually understand Israeli law, rather than trying to learn it by what Nord-Sud XXI has to say, you would know that Israel only grants automatic citizenship to Jews who are stateless. Jews who are not "stateless" (i.e. have citizenship from another country) go through a three-year period of temporary residence prior to being granted citizenship. Under Articles 5 and 6 it is quite clear that "everyone" does not go through the same naturalization process. Greek ethnics (or as the code states those who "behave as Greeks") go through an entirely different process with difference residence and ethnicity requirements.

AY: "When I was living in America in spite of the fact that legally we had all the rights of Americans, especially as a child in the early 1940`s, I thought of myself as a member of a minority community. Therefore I don`t see what is wrong in being a minority community." In Israel the State defines as "nationality" what the USA would define as "ethnicity". That matters because the the State has outsourced many of its responsibilities to "Jewish national insistutions" such as the WZO/JA, JNL, etc.. Those State institutions are legislated to provide for only *one* community - the "Jewish nationality" - to the total exclusion of minority communities (e.g. the "Druze nationality") There was "nothing wrong" with you being Jewish in America because there is "nothing special" about being Jewish in America. There is "something wrong" with being a Druze in Israel because that excludes you from "Jewish national institutions" that are, nonetheless, still part of the State.

AY: "when the Palestine refugees left, they lost the right to residency and citizenship." I have already pointed you to the article in the Partition Plan that says you are wrong; citizenship is determined by you place of habitual residency, and that place of residency no more changes because you flee a battlefield that if you were overseas on a nice holiday when that State Succession took place. AY: "Citizenship means loyalty to the state. Israel doesn`t have to take back fifth columnists, who want to subvert the state into a second Palestinian state." Already covered in Resolution 194, Avi. "Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date" Zionisism requires that the State must refuse to take ANY of these people back, and that isn't because it wants to protect "Israel". It wants to protect its own ruling REGIME. They are not the same thing, Avi.

#465 JES: " 'Nationality', as it is used, means ethnic affiliation" #484 JB: "Then you have just defined 'ethnicity', not 'nationality', in a Western nation-state." #522 JES: "You may want to take a look at the 'Greek Code of Nationality'. Article 5 makes especially good reading" Article 5: "Ethnic Greeks who are stateless or of unknown nationality, domiciled abroad and who really behave as Greeks may, provided they have attained their 18th year of age, be recognised as Greek nationals" I see Greek Law making a very definite distinction between a persons ETHNICITY and their NATIONALITY. An "Ethnic Greek" can have "unknown nationality" under Greek Law, allowing them to apply to the nearest Greek consulate to have their statelessness remedied by having Greek nationality bestowed upon them. Under Israeli Law a Jew can not have an "unknown nationality"; to be Jewish is to have "Jewish nationality" i.e. it simply exists, and is not BESTOWED upon them by Israel.

Cipora Julianna Kohn # 55 says; deport him immediately CJK Keep him in Israel. He belongs there more than here. You always attempt to portray Israel as a friend of America. If that is true, why do you want to send your pedophiles to America? Can?t you keep them there with the others? BTW, the Israeli court in one extradition case, ruled; it is not a question of right to wrong, but whether Israel will be a haven for Jews. That says it all for me. And you want to complain about the racist practices of other countries?

Lee, other info for your consideration: The Israelis control the policy in the congress and the senate." -- Senator Fullbright, Chair of Senate Foreign Relations Committee: 10/07/1973 on CBS' "Face the Nation". Also; I am aware how almost impossible it is in this country to carry out a foreign policy [in the Middle East] not approved by the Jews..... terrific control the Jews have over the news media and the barrage the Jews have built up on congressmen .... I am very much concerned over the fact that the Jewish influence here is completely dominating the scene and making it almost impossible to get congress to do anything they don't approve of. The Israeli embassy is practically dictating to the congress through influential Jewish people in the country" -----Sec. of State John Foster Dulles Lee, For Info on AIPAC, I recommend ; See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee It is the most neutral site that gives a balanced view of how AIPAC operates with and in congress. What is not covered is how AIPAC derives its power. That comes thru the network of Jewish groups that target local candidates that oppose Israel. Money and other resources are focused on a local race. The candidate is defeated. The point is then made to any politician that they too could and would be subjected to disproportionate resources from outside your district if they don?t tor the line. It is not necessary to oppose every candidate who is not in line. Makeing an example of one or two every now and then is usually sufficient to cower most politicians. Only those who are secure can defy them. But they are few. Mostly from the smaller states, such as New Hampshire and Maine where outside influence would be hard to hide and also create a backlash.

Can you explain these two comments...-Lee "2. Jewish political groups very effectively control congress and strongly influence ME policy. 3. Jewish power is not exaggerated" American in NY How do YOU think Jewish political groups "control" Congress?-Lee Lee, Simple questions but long answers. Will take some time but will try. Lets start with one example: 1. There are 13 Jewish senators in congress. That is 13 % of the senate 2. There are 3 Hispanic senators at 3%, Although, the Hispanics make up approximately 14 % of the population. 3. There is 1 Afro-American senator, although they make up approximately 13 % of the population. Now you may not think that this is excessive, but at the every least, I think that you might concede that it is disproportionate. That is a powerful swing block. Pretty much a cohesive vote, and if used as such, they can frustrate any legislation from either party, since neither party has a majority of sufficient margin over them.

JES: "You may want to take a look at the "Greek Code of Nationality". Article 5 makes especially good reading: " Yes, indeed, especially this bit: "Ethnic Greeks who are stateless or of unknown nationality" It is saying that if an individual is STATELESS, yet is ethnically greek, then Greece is willing to provide them with a State. And you are attempting to claim that Article 5 is the same as Israel's Law of Return, are you? Really? Article 6 is the proper comparison, JES. EVERYONE who is an aliaen must go thro the SAME naturalization process, tho that process is weighted in favor of "ethnic Greeks". And you are attempting to claim that the process of naturalization listed in Article 6 is the same as Israeli Law that allows Jews - and only Jews - to take up citizenship via the Law of Return? Really?

It is good to share a sense of humor and perspective here. dana does have that in abundance. but I complain of what we, Israeli taxpayers, are shedding lots of money for so many aggressive parasites. BTW, the money paid to the Gaza settlers, is beyond any imagination!- S I can imagine, but have never seen any estimates of any kind. It is a burden then for both of us, as America, regardless of what is said, has subsidized the settlements as well. I have always thought that it was wrong and wasteful. Wrong, because I don?t believe Israel is right to annex the WB, and because by doing so it creates an obstacle to peace. If that is correct, than the money would have been wasted if Israel corrects the situation and withdraws from the WB. Not that I have any expectations about Israel giving up the WB or the Golan. It is obvious they plan to keep them. As about dana`s "As for Israel as a refuge for the Jews -they need little refuge these days." I won`t argue with you - I think your answer is OK - but not dana`s:-S I think that dana?s statement reflects the situation that exists in most countries of Europe and the America?s as well. However, I don?t know if I understand your statement below; if anything, the Jews`s situation in the late 20`s, a short time before Hitler`s genocide, was better than now - in Soviet Union, Germany, France, eastern Europe, etc, they were doing quite well (and there were a lot more of them!!), if not better than now say in France, UK, etc.-S Do you mean that the Jews are not doing as well now as they did prewar ? I have a feel that our past discussions have done well to both of us despite the chasm that divides us-S I think so. I know that there are areas that we can agree on. But also important, is how we agree to disagree. The chasm you refer to is not constant in width or depth. Except when it comes to Tim R.

Jan Elshout writes that Israel as a Jewish state would make the Arab minority "without equal rights". They have formal equal rights now as a minority (how about the Jews living in Arab countries?), like for instance Dutch citizins in Holland from Maroccan origine. Does Elshout mean that being a minority in Holland means that the Maroccan-Dutch people have no equal rights? Or that Holland should give up the Dutch identity because there are minorities living within the boundaries? The very essence of establishing Israel is that it is a state/homeland for the Jewish people! Like Palestine is supposed to be a Palestinian state for the Palestinians. Will Jews be allowed to live there as a minority?

Zev, your implication that the palestinians should not have their own state and should instead go "become jordanians, iraqis, syrians and egyptians" is pretty much the same as someone telling Israelis that they never had their own independant nation either and should go back to being germans, poles, ehtiopians, french, etc. etc. How would you like to be told that?? Sounds fair to you? No?? Well then maybe you shouldn't be telling other people that their national identity is null and void simply because you're too racist and bigotted to accept that others have the same claim to the land that you call home and try instead to be a civilized human being and realize that you won't come to any solution unless you SIT DOWN AND NEGOTIATE with the palestinains..oh yeah.. and in regards to your comments of them murdering women and children..lets not mention Israel's summer 2006 foray into lebanon in which "only hezbollah militants" were targetted..yeah right.

Bradley, you are absolutely right refuting Saeb Erekat's absurd statement that "No state in the world connects its national identity to a religious identity". Your subsequent attack on "leftists the world over", however, is confused. It is perfectly consistent to accept that some states have an official religion and bias their political system towards the values of that religion while criticizing any bias based on descent. If I understand correctly, for purposes e.g. of the Law of Return, the definition of "Jewish" is based on both religion and descent. While I'm glad my state is secular, it does have laws based on dominant values and thus "discriminates" against those who hold other values -- this is to some degree inevitable (though of course not to the degree practiced in many Muslim states). But no state should discriminate on the basis of descent.

when the Palestine refugees left , they lost the right toresidency and citizenship. Citizenship means loyalty to the state. Israel doesn't have to take back fifth columnists, who want to subvert the state into a second Palestinian state. I don't know what Zipi Livni has in mind when she says that a Palestinian state is a solution for the Israeli Arabs. but Iam sure thathe fact that Israeli arabs are no longer willing to acquiesse that Israel is ca Jewish state and that they are a minority community and they refer to themselves as Palestinians living in Israel and not as Israeli Arabs, is giving thoughts to the powers in government to something. I don't know what that something is. When Iwas living in America in spite of the fact that legally we had all the rights of Americans, especially as a child in the early 1940's, I thought of myself as a member of a minority community. Therefore I don't see what is wrong in being a minority community.

from aiding 'Palestinian Refugees'to get Arab Citizenship is a harsh and cruel Resolution passed against their own people. Many were Arab workers sent to Palestine under the auspices of one a Nazi Arab Mufti HaJ Amin al Husseini [on Google]with the intent of combating the influx of Jewish immigration into Palestine after the Holocaust. Husseini's plan however did not work out because when Arabs rejected the Partition Plan in 1947, they started a war against the Jews and were defeated. It was then that the Arab emigreit workers wished to go back to their Homelands and were rejected when they then had to return to Palestine for shelter being 'displaced persons' to be cared for by UNRWA. Not long after Arab League Ministers issued a Resolution stating that No Arab Government Should Grant Citizenship to Palestinian Refugees to assure themselves of no further problems from these 'troublesome people'. Arabs knew of course who they sent.

at any rate not after Annapolis this year. Therefore Bradley Burston, your heart need not run away with pity for the Arab Refugees because the Arab League Ministers themselves issued a RESOLUTION in the 1950s stating that "NO ARAB GOVERNMENT SHOULD GRANT CITIZENSHIP TO PALESTINIAN REFUGEES knowing well wnough exactly who a goodly part of them really are. Is there not proof enough today??? Keep that heart solely for yourself and some for the Jewish State who is being made a 'SCAPEGOAT' by America and Condaleezza Rice for perhaps some solely selfish reason such as a Parting Gift to George Bush as that never seen before like a 'Palestine State'! with visions of that 'Handshake on the Lawns of the White House' during the sultry warm winter sunshine of 2007. Don't say nobody warned you......!

with his imaginary Famous Circular Argument Since you are writing my responses for me, it is no wonder you are having a circular argument. But it obviously the conversation you are having, isn?t with me, it is with yourself. For example; and what did he mean by the term "the first round"? He meant the formation of the state of Israel.-Tim R I didn?t say that nor did I say anything that would suggest that. You are dishonest, but it is also obvious that your reading comprehension is piss poor.

knows no bounds. Such Arrogance when no Arab Country will accept you and you have to fall upon Israel, the Jewish State and an enemy for help. How low can you stoop? Quoting you: - "We won't recognize you but you will come to Annapolis and agree to etablish Palestine". What makes you so sure? Might that be the reason why Arab Leaders passed a Resolution stating that no Arab Government should grant citizenship to Palestinian Refugees? Furthermore, is that the reason why the Israeli War Hero Zeevi said 'TRANSFER' you all back to your Arab Homelands and he was assassinated by your people for telling the truth? Mohammad, take it from me, a little 'humility'sometimes is far better than arrogance such as yours because 'Pride always comes before a Fall' and you may be disappointed with Annapolis in the end.Israel is not as easy as you would believe

Their "us against the world" attitude has turned into exactly that.

I loved the "welfare queens" for the Israeli West Bankers. I know you complain of the American money coming this way, (which I don't agree with because it's needed for defense), but I complain of what we, Israeli taxpayers, are shedding lots of money for so many aggressive parasites. BTW, the money paid to the Gaza settlers, is beyond any imagination! As about dana's "As for Israel as a refuge for the Jews -they need little refuge these days." I won't argue with you - I think your answer is OK - but not dana's: if anything, the Jews's situation in the late 20's, a short time before Hitler's genocide, was better than now - in Soviet Union, Germany, France, eastern Europe, etc, they were doing quite well (and there were a lot more of them!!), if not better than now say in France, UK, etc. I have a feel that our past discussions have done well to both of us despite the chasm that divides us...

Incidentally, what`s the deal with the "historical Jewish trait of hiding one`s wealth?" Where did you get that from?-Lee Lee, I don?t remember whether it was one of my history classes or a book. The scenarios (examples) I remember were, the Spanish inquisition, and some rioting and looting of the Jewish quarter in London some centuries ago. The statement that stayed with me, was that the Jews were generally somewhat circumspect in the display of their wealth in this period, during the middle ages, lest it attract unnecessary attention and create undesirable jealousy. Possibly provoking a Jew tax or an provoke someone to find an excuse to find a violent way to take it from him. Most of the riots and such against the Jews were really for economic gain of some sort. I don?t say that Jews haven?t before or don?t now days flaunt their wealth. But the Spanish inquisition was not about punishing the nonbelievers. It was about confiscating wealth. Also, I think that you are misunderstanding something. Your post sounds like dana and I believe that Jews are in absolute control. We are not saying that. Lets say tey are very significant. Like everything in politics, you don?t win all of them, but the game is to win most of them .and AIPAC does. Anyway, it was just a thought, I do not say that it is correct. Speculation. I am in a relaxed mode tonight so I am cherry picking your posts as to what I want to respond to. Nothing serious as you can see.

I think that dana was being satirical as opposed to...insulting. I thought it kind of humorous"-AINY. If you can`t understand that calling an orthodox man a "welfare queen" is insulting, ~. Would it be funny to call a black man the same?- Lee Lee, Actually, the term welfare queen originated here in America and was originally applied to blacks. So in fact, at that time, it was commonly used that way in referring to all blacks on welfare. It did finally fall out of use and haven?t heard for many years. I believe that the Orthodox Jews are the ones that dress in black. And it appears that they fit the definition that fit the term. A sense of humor can go a long way. Maybe rather than me being insensitive, maybe you are too sensitive. Do not misunderstand, and attribute to malice or meanness when none is meant. Every society and culture has their absurdities. ""As for Israel as a refuge for the Jews -they need little refuge these days. I can agree with dana on this~ I`m afraid that it will many years before we can consider anti-Semitism (and genecide) a thing of the past.-Lee Lee, Be realistic, forget about talking of anti-Semitism. Jews are racists also. Racism is not just a Jewish thing. Racism is part of the human condition and will always be part. Racism will never be a thing of the past. Because if that, I added the fact that there are pockets or areas where Jews might be discriminated against. But they are not the only ones. Also, for the same reason, I see that Israel will always be necessary. The point everyone is in disagreement about here is what kind of Israel. BTW, Israel is not committing genecide, as you have said.-Lee I had a discussion with someone else about this some time agoand consequently no longer describe it that way. BTW, my post out of sequence to yours will explain next.

Hello, How about allowing access to this article? Do you mind? I often wonder why I say the things I shouldn't say. But then again it's always me who has to ruin your day.

You may want to take a look at the "Greek Code of Nationality". Article 5 makes especially good reading: http://www.geocities.com/nationalite/greek-eng.txt

I suggest you study up a bit more on your Greek law. The Greek ethnic not only gets preference but also does not have the same residence requirement as a non-Greek ethnic "alien". I guess by your definition, for a Palestinian state to be a "Western democracy", then a Jewish settler born in the West Banks should have Palestinian citizenship, and a third-generation child of a Palestinian refugee born in Dearborn, Michigan should have to go through naturalization?

If Israel is the antithesis of democracy because it is a Jewish state, what about Ireland? It is time for you Irish to end your brutal occupation of British lands and recognize Britain's "right of return." P.S. What you call Israel's "brutal occupation" is self-defense against Palestinian terror.

My opinion, if I may? Not one refugee should be resettled in Israel. Period. The settlers have to return to Israel - preferably willingly. Period. Both are conditions for the survival of Israel, as a state Jewish in character, and democratic, and if we don't want it, in the future, be spoken of as another March of Folly.

JES: "Just as Ireland, Germany and Greece - to name three - are states for all the Irish, Germans and Greeks throughout the world as well as for whichever other "nationalities" are or become nationals of these states" Tosh. There is a New Yorker, born and bred there. So were his parents. All are proud of their greek heritage. What obligation IN GREEK LAW does Greece owe to that man? Nothing. What rights and privileges IN GREEK LAW can that man claim from Greece? Nothing. And if he wants to go to Greece and become a "Greek National"? He has to go through the SAME immigration procedure as an other foreign national, even if those procedures may be skewed to favour him because of his "heritage". Now, his neighbor in The Bronx is Jewish. Is THAT man's relationship IN ISRAELI LAW the same wrt the State of Israel as his "greek" friends relationship to the State of Greece? No, it isn't, and you damn well know it.

AY: "would you agree that not one refugee has to be resettled in Israel proper, if the settlers are returned West of the green line?" Go look in the Partition Plan 1947, Avi; everyone - christian, muslim, jew - whose RESIDENCY was in the "Israeli" side of that partition line gained citizenship to that new state. It did not matter if they had fled because of fighting between Jew and Arab - their RESIDENCY was inside the state of Israel, and so they became Israelis as soon as the State was declared. So those refugees have every right to insist on returning to Israel - as Israeli citizens -because the very resolution that legitimized the creation of a State of Israel also insisted that those people be "Israelis".

You will surely agree that we have much more to fear from Egypt as a potential threat to us, than of what a Palestinian state could ever be. Then, I wonder, how come we failed to demand from President Anwar Sadat, "a recognition of the Jewish people as a people as all other peoples, with the right to national self-determination and statehood, the nation-state of Israel." (Israel Israeli) ? And, supposing we had done just that, please tell me, do you really believe he would have obliged? Like, for instance, in saying in Jerusalem, to our Knesset: "Bismillah, Yes, Zionism is right, the Jewish people has indeed the right to national self-determination and statehood !" ? Personally, I doubt it.

"Jewish political groups very effectively control Congress." (A in NY) More than the Oil Lobby? Or the Christian Majority? An opinion which, at least to me, doesn't seem to reflect the reality. I just don't see how ascribing "the successes that Jewish people have had in America" to the 'Jewish power', can be substantiated, and that is also true for "the Jewish history trait of disguising or hiding ones wealth". (A in NY) Search for "Yitzhak Tshuva" AND "Las Vegas", and please tell us if this a way to hide. "I must return now to my education of Tim R." (A in NY) Good luck. Regards.

They were 'foreign colonisers' because they wanted, from the beginning, to set up a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine. That is what has caused all this trouble for the world. Whether some were refugees or not is irrelevant. Muslim migrants in Europe are not there to create new Muslim states, despite what some of the paranoids on these Talkbacks may say, so they are not colonisers.

What you consider to be fact, others consider to be opinion. This is a fact, not an opinion.

"Jewish power is present...I wonder if the desire to deny it isn?t part of the Jewish history trait of disguising or hiding ones wealth"-AINY. Nope. Jews object vehemently to such characterizations because we have a very long history of accusations of undue influence and dual loyalty -- accusatons that have led the murder of millions of us. I don't deny that there are powerful Jews. And I don't deny that Jews have influence. But Jews don't control the media. They don't control the White House. They don't control the Congress. Our country has not been hijacked by a cabal of Jews. We object to the way that Jewish power is characterized by many because it is not true and because we are afraid of where such thinking will lead us. Tell me, if you think that the US has a "Jewish control problem," what do you think we should do about it? Incidentally, what's the deal with the "historical Jewish trait of hiding one's wealth?" Where did you get that from?

"They were never an independent nation in this area." (Zev) Neither was a United State of America, before the 4th of July, 1776. Should we demand its dissolution? "Let them be Jordanians, Iraqis, Syrians and Egyptians." (Zev) How do you propose Israel should persuade them to do just that? Just curious. "They want to destroy Israel." (Zev) Then, our sole ally is an idiot, and Israel is doomed. See for yourself: "Yesterday, in my speech to the United Nations, I said that you are (Chairman Mahmoud Abbas) a man of peace, who believes in a two-state solution. And after our conversation today, once again you confirmed that. I fully understand there must be leaders willing to speak out and act on behalf of people who yearn for peace, and you are such a leader.[...] "... the vision that so many Palestinians long for, and that is a society in which they can raise their children in peace and hope." President GW Bush, September 2006. www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060920-1.html "the Pals never have been known for either their truthfulness or, brains." (Petra) And you are WRONG!!!! too. For if they are brainless, then how come they are still here, and we, with all our (brilliant?) brains, have not succeeded yet, after 60 years, to solve the problem? As for "truthfulness", who is the dimwitted who told you that Peace agreements are based on truthfulness?

if you believe that a jewish state will never survive, then please tell me which other state will survive....Some people in the world maybe tired, but they do not know how lucky they are to have those few millions of jewish people who brought so much from the real begining.

"I think that dana was being satirical as opposed to...insulting. I thought it kind of humorous"-AINY. If you can't understand that calling an orthodox man a "welfare queen" is insulting, then you are beyond hope. Would it be funny to call a black man the same? "An Israeli state that does not incorporate its Arab population as full citizens...is only prolonging an intolerable situation"-AINY. Agreed. And many Israelis would agree, as well. "As for Israel as a refuge for the Jews -they need little refuge these days. I can agree with dana on this." It has only been 60 years since the Holocaust, and survivors and perpetrators are still living. I'm afraid that it will many years before we can consider anti-Semitism (and genecide) a thing of the past. BTW, Israel is not committing genecide, as you have said. I cannot defend or condone the killing of innocent Pals, but it is not genecide. See the UN definition. "I can also agree with you..that the Jews need their own state." OK!!!!

Thanks for the response. Can you explain these two comments... "2. Jewish political groups very effectively control congress and strongly influence ME policy. 3. Jewish power is not exaggerated" American in NY How do YOU think Jewish political groups "control" Congress? Explain what YOU mean by Jewish power. Power over what? And how is that power exerted? Thanks.

Strange definitions you have there: I am an active member of an organization dedicated to peace and reconciliation between Jews and Arabs. Why not be honest and say your organisation is dedicated to kicking out the Jews. Your every message says this. You are SUCH a hypocrite.

We can save all the kerfuffle. If that's how you feel you can just all move to Arabia and let's not bother about Annapolis. Nobody wants you around anyway. All the rest was being polite. But if you have no consideration you get none. BYE NOW.

Lee- I am an active member of an organization dedicated to peace and reconciliation between Jews and Arabs. I believe that Israel is guilty of human rights abuses, that Israel`s settlement policy is insane, and that Palestinians have a right to self-determination and an independent state. Congratulations. I believe that the Palestinians are just as guilty. I am not interested in who is worse or who is at fault. That discussion leads exactly nowhere. Although, that is what Tim R loves to argue about so much. I also agree with rest of what you say. Lee-Here are a few sample options: Show us that you don`t have an exaggerated view of Jewish power. Tell us that you don`t believe that Jews control American foreign policy in the Middle East. Tell us that you believe that the UN was right in establishing a Jewish state in areas of 1948 Palestine where there was a Jewish majority. I can only do one out of the three. 1. The UN did the right thing in establishing the state of Israel. 2. Jewish political groups very effectively control congress and strongly influence ME policy. 3. Jewish power is not exaggerated. A fault in our political system makes this exploitation possible. If the Muslims had the financial means and disciplined organization, they could and would do it also. Although, there is already one Muslim congressman, and when there are two or three more I think that AIPAC will be challenged. Jewish power is present. To deny it is to not acknowledge the successes that Jewish people have had in America. I wonder if the desire to deny it isn?t part of the Jewish history trait of disguising or hiding ones wealth. I don?t say it is evil. But it is there. I don?t see how you can view the last two as evidence of racism. If they are not true, than that would be a different matter. There is ample evidence to support what I say. I must return now to my education of Tim R.

Lee, If I may join the conversation. I think that dana was being satirical as opposed to being insulting. Actually, I thought it kind of humorous. But, I am sure that there are many Israeli?s that feel the same way about it is as dana describes it. But, the issue of whether Israeli?s should subsidize their religious sect or sects is an internal affair that does not involve me. It is a cultural or nation quirk no different than those found in Saudi Arabia and mostly confined to Muslim countries. Also, I am confused about the entire issue of why the Israeli govt cares how the Palestinians recognize the state of Israel. It is impossible for Israel to demand the same of other nations. But an Israeli state that does not incorporate its Arab population as full citizens with equal rights is only prolonging an intolerable situation. But again, it isn?t my issue. .-dana , As for Israel as refuge for the Jews - they need little refuge these days I can agree with dana on this. The period of need in providing a haven because of persecution in other countries has pretty much passed. However, I can also agree with you from the perspective that the Jews need their own state. Persecution has not entirely disappeared and the future is always uncertain.

leaders will not move without certain guarantees, including a recognition of the Jewish people as a people as all other peoples with the right to national slef-determination and statehood, the nation-state of Israel.

We won't recognize you but you will come to Annapolis and agree to establish Palestine. A state in the West Bank and Gaza is stage 1 of our return to our land. The world will continue to support our right of return. Our fighters will continue to attack your settlements of sderot and Tel Aviv. Eventually you will move back to Europe and Palestine will be reborn.

We decided in 1967 that the best way to see to our own security is provide it for our neighbour. After protracted deliberation we've come to the conclusion that the only thing for us in Gaza is sand. Jerusalem and the West Bank however are another story. One thing we could do is to arrange a mandate of security, much like the British did for us, while the Palestinians build themselves a state from the bottom up, as we did.

What do you mean when you say Jewish State, you can't be vague, romantic or even sympathetic, you have to spell it out in simple, universal terms. There are a couple of precedents to build upon. The Jewish People exist, one look at the history books will show as much. For one reason or another they have decided to unite, and this is the only place that unites them all. Various states have supported the idea of a Jewish homeland here and continue to do so. A Jewish Homeland could be a compromise that brings peace to traditionally the traditionally warring factions of East & West; or a Jewish Sate (presumabaly the only exclusively Jewish one in the U.S.A.) could wage it's way bloody through another chapter of 'Crusades & Jihads' an international best-seller. Have a nice day :o)

howfun, FYI, you should temper your statement with the understanding that Israel has been a welfare client of America for some time. Without the significant aid from America, reparations from Germany and other aid, Israel would most cetainly be at the same level economically as its neighbors. This is not meant to get involved in the issue between you and dana, just a fact.

What really matters is "whether the Palestinians can live alongside a state which happens to be Jewish in character", not "whether they choose to formally recognize Israel as a Jewish state". You said it yourself. Then, what was the point in taking the Pal. leadership to task for not being prepared to recognize it "as a Jewish state", and in qualify them, for having made that clear to everyone, as leaders "even worse than ours" ? In that sense, I believe we would have been better off without this confusing article of yours. The rational given by Zionism is that anti-Semitism is ineradicable, conflict with the gentile world will be permanent, that only a Jewish state has the capability to offer protection for the world's Jews, and therefore, that it is right for the Jewish people to re-establish his own homeland, like any other distinct people has established. That is why, for us Zionists, Israel has to be, and stay, a Jewish state, meaning a state Jewish in character (and democratic, if we want it to exist for long - and not be a transient phenomenon, a spasm, in the history of the Jewish people). For us Zionists, not for anyone else. This is why it is totally irrational to expect the Palestian state-to-be to acknowledge, not merely the existence at its side of a neighbour state's existence, one which happens to be Jewish in character, - but its undisputed Right to be a Jewish state. That would be demanding its representatives to admit that Zionism is right. You know, as much as I do, that no Arab leader having done that, would survive for long, he and his regime. Then, what exactly would Israel gain from it?

Our leaders like ourselves have to deal in the now. De facto: we provide security in Jerusalem; Gazans have separated themselves and now have a state with no future; all of us have to write a new law book starting from the very beginning because the Temple is the definition of international.

but, the Pals never have been known for either their truthfulness or, brains.

What is your own personal history? For how many generations has your family inhabited the house you live in? You seem to have the view that people who have no home and have been displaced by war and upheaval have no place in the world and should quietly die by the roadside so as not to upset your idea of what belongs to whom.

I take it you have never heard of the Hebron Massacre of Jews by Arabs in Hebron in 1929.

Even if you arent a member of a video club I suppose you are a citizen of a country and you will find within that country there are people who consider it the best country in the world and sneer at others on that basis. You will also find people within the country who disparage it, as you find people within each religion who disparage it. Take the 20th century as an example where the wars on a Nationalistic basis were much fiercer and involved much more of the world than any religious wrangle. A country is just another organisation.

This is not necessaraly my point of view, but for argument's sake would you agree that not one refugee has to be resettled in Israel proper, if the settlers are returned West of the green line?

"does Israel exist FOR all the Israelis?" Yes! Yet, indeed, there are differences which are also viewed differently by different nationals - One way to look is who is doing army duty: most Jews, but Druze too. Plenty of other Jews - extremists religious don't, just as most Arabs. In a war, the army protects them, they stay alive. Isn't that a priviledge? They aren't included in the tens of thousands dead Israeli soldiers. Another way to look is semantically, as you do: "Why pretend that you are anything other than a theocratic state?" This is simply exagerated. The many religious rules are indeed a pain in the neck for most Israelis and are circumvented more and more. But, on the whole, it's quite bearable, and I am speaking as coming from the US here. There are already shops in Israel open 7/24, pork wherever you want it, etc. So, in practical money, what the hell are you complaining of? Words? Why don't you look at the words (and deeds) coming out of Moslem countries?

"the world never heard of such a thing prior to the 70's" except when referring to the people who were living in Palestine under the British Mandate. EVERYONE LIVING THERE WAS A PALESTINIAN but after the Creation of the State of Israel in 1947, Jews became Israelis and everyone else had to revert b ack to his original identity and Arabs became known officially as Palestinian/Arabs.

He is a known manipulator. Anything you say will be taken and manipulated. His hubris is such that even though he knows no hebrew, he will argue about translations that he has no way of verifying himself. In other words, there is no point arguing with him.

I don't understand your argument because it has lost any pretense of coherence! Johnbaby, we are talking about a TRANSLATION. Call le'om "ethnicity" if you want. "ezrahut" means BOTH citizenship AND nationality (in your sense). Perhaps you don't know it, but "ezrah" means both "citizen" and "civilian". Does that mean that all civilians are citizens? Gawd you are obtuse, in addition all your other character faults!

The three are in no way mutually exclusive. Just as Ireland, Germany and Greece - to name three - are states for all the Irish, Germans and Greeks throughout the world as well as for whichever other "nationalities" are or become nationals of these states, so Israel is *in principle* a state for the Jews. At the sme time it is *in practice* a state for its citizens. No contradiction, and this certainly isn't "theocratic", because there's nothing "divine" about it, as the Law of Return states explicitly, there are two ways for a Jew to be listed as such: by ethnic affiliation or by religion.

Indeed we remained a quite distinct ethnic unit within the general population in a land X, sharing our own religion, but race? We are not even a homogenate folk. We bear the features of nearly every race living on the globe: Africans, whites, Arab like, Indians or Indo’s (mixture between whites and people of Indonesia). Two thousands years are a very long time. It is somehow miraculous that we stayed together; especially in countries we were not hated.

What do you mean doesn't "belong to them"? Sure Israel defines itself as the state of the Jewish nation. The Palestinian constitution begins with these words: "Palestine is part of the large Arab World, and the Palestinian people are part of the Arab Nation. Arab Unity is an objective which the Palestinian People shall work to achieve." So who does it belong to? Obviously, you have never lived as a minority in a Western and democratic state. I assure you that there are many Muslims in your own country who cannot accept the Australian flag as "belonging to them" because it has a cross on it ? no matter how often you try to explain to them that this cross has nothing to do with religion today. Does this mean that Australia does not "belong to them", or that once they have Australian "nationality", or at the point that they receive a passport, their ethnicity will disappear? The question of whether or not Israel "belongs to" the Jewish people worldwide is irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not people have the rights and obligations of citizens (or nationals). That's what is relevant in every democracy ? Western or otherwise.

JES: "There is no contradiction here." Wanna bet? JES: " 'Citizenship' refers to rights and obligations of an individual as a member of a nation state" You have just defined "nationality" in a Western Nation-State, not "citizenship". Citizenship is the right of the individual to engage in the "body politic". Nationality in a Western Nation-State is to acknowledge a two-way obligation between that "national" and their "nation-state". Simply put: To have American nationality means that you belong to the State and the State belongs to you. To have American citizenship means that you can vote, and avail yourself of the priviliges provided by the state. JES: " 'Nationality', as it is used, means ethnic affiliation" Then you have just defined "ethnicity", not "nationality", in a Western nation-state. Your "Hebrew" definitions contradict the western definitions, and that's why you don't even comprehend my argument, JES.

And that will rid ourselves of any prevarication. Israeli law defines the State of Israel as "Jewish and democratic". It's a simple statement, and it can be answered simply and without prevarication. Israeli law defines the State of Israel as "Jewish and democratic". Do you agree, or don't you?

AY: "Therefore we don`t have to recognize 'Palestine' as an Arab state and the settlement may stay in their place (under Arab rule)." You don't have to recognize Palestine as an *arab* nation, Avi. You do need to recognize Palestine as a *sovereign* nation. How else are you going to sign a peace treaty with it? As for the settlements staying put; so sorry, but you run afoul of International Law. If they were there LEGALLY then, yes, State Succession would mean that the Palestinian state inherits those people as well as their land. But they are not there legally, and it isn't their land; nobody but Israel accepts that the colonization of that land by Israeli nationals is anything other than land-theft. In short: they are not legally resident on that land. They have simply stolen that land. Therefore a Palestinian state has every right to demand that the IDF take out the garbage and sweep up the riff-raff when she leaves.

S: "Of course Israel was created for Jews coming to it from all corners of the world!" And so the implications are......? Are what, S? Come on, you tell me; 1) does Israel exist FOR the Jews of the world?2) does Israel exist FOR the Jews of Israel? 3) does Israel exist FOR all the Israelis? Which one is it, S? That has implications in a world of nation-states, because if the answer is (1) then there are a significant proportion of Israeli citizens who simply are not Israeli nationals under Israeli Law, because the state doesn't belong to them. They just live in it, and enjoy civil rights according to their citizenship. If it is (1) then this State has deliberately broken the nexus between CITIZENSHIP and NATIONALITY in a way that has no parallel in any Western nation. Fine. It can do that. But why deny it? Why pretend that you are anything other than a theocratic state? Just say it proudly, like ol' Avi Yerushalmi. At least he is being honest.

i.e. the necessity of states curtailing civil liberties in times of war. Agreed, Tim. But my argument still exists even after Israel "achieves peace". It's this: Israeli Law defines the State as "Jewish and democratic", and that 1st portion means that the State exists for the Jews. And those Jews are the "Am Yisrael" i.e. they are the worldwide "Jewish nation", not just Israeli Jews. Israel does not belong to all of its own citizens i.e. those who are non-Jewish have no stake in this State, because the State doesn't belong to THEM, or for THEM, even if the State allows them to partake in the "body politic". But taking part in the "body politic" is the "and democratic" portion, and that's a feature of citizenship, not nationality. This arrangement has no parallel with any western nation, yet we have people like S and JES claiming that: 1) It is a distinctly Jewish concept 2) It is really no different than any other State Those statements can't both be right.

"In 1900, Jews made up only 4 per cent of the Palestinian population."(Boycott) And your point is??? But since you raised this, then for the record: Before the Arab armies invaded Palestine in 634AD, the Arabs made up 0% of Palestine's population! And another thing: The TOTAL population of Palestine in 1900, was about 600,000. The TOTAL population in the same area TODAY is approaching 11,000,000 and there is still room for growth. Do you understand what that means? It means that the place was sparsely populated and there was plenty of room for new immigrants, in fact, immigration was beneficial. "All the Jewish immigrants since then were foreign colonisers."(Boycott) Correction: They were allowed to immigrate lawfully by the sovereign powers. Oh, and by the way, those Jews were mostly refugees! And I assume that you don't call the millions of Muslims who immigrated and settled in Europe "Colonisers"?! Or are you saying that they too have no right to be in Europe?

"TR: "Your lesson you gave me about Israeli nationality was answered by others who know such details." I never said the above words, S did although I fully agree with him. I agree with his subsequent response of #474 as well ... The only thing that I'll add is this: Israel has been at war with it's Arab neighbours for 60 years and as such, it has been forced to enforce some measures, for the sake of it's security, that may seem discriminatory but nevertheless they are necessary. And so long as it's neighbours will continue with the war, Israel has nothing to apologize for. Do you know why? FIRST: Because it's Arab citizens are still being treated well as proven by the fact that the Arabs of Jerusalem are clamouring to obtain Israeli citizenship. SECOND: Because all countries enforce security measures during times of war. Australia did too during WW2. Are you aware that it interned it's German and Italian citizens into camps in order to be able to keep an eye on them?

Klaudia helloooo! I waited,and waited for such a long time,not only for ?part two?of your scrumptious dinner party, I also missed part three until today Thursday. And when I read it I said:WOW! What a lovely composition you made of it. I was terribly honoured for the job you ascribed to myself. And will do my outmost not to let you down?honest injun! I enjoyed it so much with a ?hoot of laughter?..As usual your versatility shines through. Oh well,back to my ?boudoir?,or shall I say ?the crow room?to help the leftists with their demands to cure their ills. We can then enjoy our real ?repas? in good harmony with Gabe and some equally nice?.You know? Klaudia I keep all your rhymes/poems, and good post for my delectation.I even print them for good measure. Now smile you?re on camera! Now dear Klaudia do not neglect us will you.Our dear Cipora has asked the same.A couple of months ago. So I am not the only one who appreciates your posts and good humour.You were busy, had an accident etc.And promised to be with us. Keep well, take good care of yourself now willya! The Very Best Regards

A hatred of Jews and an unwilingness to c-exist have been hallmarks of the Arabs/Palestinians since the days of the Balfour Declaration and prior. Nothing has changed and it's unlikely it ever will. Another opportunity to miss an opportunity or as Forrest Gump famously stated "Stupid is, stupid does"

it is only because the ARABS see it as a CRIME. Itwas there, this Jewish State and even a Kingdom! while Arabs were still Bedouins in the Desert. Whats to-do about it now...? Let's not forget the vast expanse of land that Arabs have, 99.09% of the mass notwithstanding desertland because with money another Dubai can grow out of the sands... Yet Arabs grudge the Jewish people that 0.01% of land on the coastline which has always been the Homeland of the Jewish people those thousands of years ago when Arabs were still Bedouins in the Desert. What is their objection to helping their Brethren the Palestinians with a 23rd Arab State in their own lands? but rather allowing this Conflict to fuel more daily when they might easily solve the problem by taking on their responsibilitiy towards their own people...? Take a guess why. The Answer is simple - to Punish Israel for the Crime!

And you know what? Semantics are the pleasure of losers. Of course Israel was created for Jews coming to it from all corners of the world! To have a place free from persecution, pogroms and holocausts just in case it's needed; as history has shown such need time and again for the last 2000 years. If you don't like it go to Lukas Heights and ask for a bomb. You can call it Little Boy or John Boy...

"Now, you go and prove to me you are..never been guilty of a single racist thought towards arabs" Dana. Sorry, can't prove a negative. (And you said you were a scientist!) Here's what I can tell you: I am an active member of an organization dedicated to peace and reconciliation between Jews and Arabs. I believe that Israel is guilty of human rights abuses, that Israel's settlement policy is insane, and that Palestinians have a right to self-determination and an independent state. Now it's you turn to show your true colors. And no cheating!! Here are a few sample options: Show us that you don't have an exaggerated view of Jewish power. Tell us that you don't believe that Jews control American foreign policy in the Middle East. Tell us that you believe that the UN was right in establishing a Jewish state in areas of 1948 Palestine where there was a Jewish majority. Good luck!

Therefore we don't have to recognize 'Palestine' as an Arab state and the settlement may stay in their place (under Arab rule).

Ben-Gurion once said that "what is important is not what the Gentiles say but wat the Jews do". thatis our basic atitude. Ifsecularists and ne-Hellenists want to currie favor with the West, tan that's there problem . We theocrats think differant.

"If that is not the case, then prove it." (lee) "Would the above do?" Dana Nope. (I'm sorry to have to tell you this - I'm just being honest - but you often write a lot of words but say nothing.) Show us that you are not motivated by anti?Semitism or any innate hostility toward Israel. How about saying something genuinely complementary of Jews and Israel? Betcha can't do it!! And no cheating!!!

You, sonny, prevaricate! Of course it exists under law, and it's been put in front of your face in black and white. I'm surprised that even an Aussie law student can't understand. ROFLMFAO.

TR: "Your lesson you gave me about Israeli nationality was answered by others who know such details." No, Tim. JES in particular obfuscates what happens when Israeli Law defines the State as "Jewish and Democratic". By so defining itself it ensures that Arab citizens are not part of "the State", because the state exists both a) for the "Jewish nation" and b) is of the "Jewish nation" Simply put, Tim R, the State is telling some of its own citizens that it does not belong to them; they simply live in it. Ben Gurion understood: "It is not a Jewish state merely because Jews are the majority of its population, it is a state for Jews everywhere, and for every Jew who wants it." Israel exists for THOSE people, Tim, and not for all its citizens. And that is because its citizens are not automatically its nationals i.e. the State belongs to "Jewish nationals" - everywhere - and not the "Israeli nationals". Because the latter simply doesn't exist under Israeli law.

Reevaluating. Every state (or resembling entity) is composed of 2 factors. the people and the power that rules them. in israel, politics are strong. they spent lifetimes digging underground tunnels to constitute a secretive network throughout the entire planet earth. Israeli politicians have connections with practically everyone, including Arabs. so taking over Palestine was a piece of cake (that still contains unprocessed ingredients). the Israeli people now have a country. Arab politicians (and men in power) are too occupied with their bellies, that are being lavishly fed and watered by smarter strategies that are busy taking over the world while throwing crumbs they can disband to Arabs. the Arab people may have ephemeral resources, but their coutnries are being shattered. slowly but efficiently... by those smarter strategies. these are facts hence this article is useless, and irresponsible you do NOT represent the world, Mr Burston. what the world has shown we will see.

The document was not submitted by an unnamed NGO. It was submitted by North-South XXI an NGO that sponors the Muammar Qaddafi prize for Human Rights. (That's not a joke.)

There is no contradiction here. I go by the Hebrew definition, in this case, because that's the primary language in which the laws in question were written. ?Citizenship? refers to rights and obligations of an individual as a member of a nation state, i.e. as a "national" of that state. The term ?ezrahut? is used consistently here by Israel in the laws in question. It is a legal status. ?Nationality?, as it is used, means ethnic affiliation (which is the English term used in the official translation of the Law of Return). The term ?le?om? is, again, used here consistently in Israeli law and practice. This term has to do with personal affiliation or identification as part of a national (in the sense of common culture, language and history) or ethnic group. Again, there is no contradiction with your supposed ?Western? definitions. Many Americans, for example, identify themselves as US citizens or US nationals, while at the same time identifying themselves ethnically as ?African-Americans? or ?Hispanic-Americans?, or nationally as ?Mexican-Americans? or ?Italian-Americans?. Further, the US federal government and local governments use these ethnic or national affiliations both in legal and non-legal contexts and, in fact, use them to discriminate. So, for example people with certain ethnic affiliations receive preference in a variety of situations such as acceptance at state-run academic institutions and in receiving government grants and fellowships.

"Still not addressing the OTHER link I gave you in post number #408, I see...." Playing the old shell game, are we? This is no different from the Qumsiyeh argument. It is the same inaccurate argument that was presented to the defunct UN Commission on Human Rights by unnamed "NGOs". It starts with the same bogus assertion that the, so-called "Status Law" and the Law of Return are "Basic Laws" (which they are not), and makes the same unfounded assertions. As a document, this has no more weight (perhaps even less) than the Government of Israel document to which it responds.

"Tim R # 355 your revision of history sucks as usual"(ANY) Which part of my statement is a revision ANY? Fact: Palestine wasn't a sovereign Arab land for over 1000 years. Fact: Both Jews and Arabs lived in Palestine for over 1000 years. Fact: The Jews were oppressed by the Muslims in Jerusalem where Jews were a majority in 1855. Fact: Pal Arabs massacred and ethnically cleansed Hebron's Jews in 1929. Fact: Both Arabs and Jews migrated to Palestine. So your statement below is A LIE! "Had the indigenous Arab population meekly surrendered their land to the peace loving Jews and moved away, all this trouble could have been avoided, right?"(ANY) A LIE because IT WASN'T JUST ARAB LAND. IT WAS JEWISH LAND TOO and prior to 1947, Jews didn't push Arabs off their land. They BOUGHT land for good money! So BOTH Arabs AND Jews owned private land and the rest was crown land, NOT Arab land, Kapish Any?

Did you take lessons in contorting yourself into knots, or does it come naturally? The difference between "state land" and "national land" is quite simple. One has to do with the legal entity - the state. The second has to do with a national entity in the sense of ethnic affiliation or identity. (For example, Hamas argues that all of Palestine is Muslim waqf, i.e. not "state land", but land of the Muslim "nation" ('umma).) The fact that some state land owned by the JNF has been restricted to use by Jews is a separate issue, and this issue has been, and is being, handled by the courts, who have indicated their opposition to such practices. The fact that the English translation of very clearly distinct Hebrew terms does not match Johnboy's imaginary translation has nothing to do with the fact that a citizen of Israel is, by all Israeli laws and practices, an Israeli national irrespective of his or her "national" or ethnic affiliation. For example, this holds true even if an Arab citizen demands, ethnically, to be referred to as a Palestinian-Israeli or a ?1947 Arab?.

Your lesson you gave me about Israeli nationality was answered by others who know such details. Simply, and politely put, you were incorrect. It is just amazing what you, and so many other Israeli bashers from all corners of the world, do on this talkback, by spending time, all your time, to research anything that will be in full harmony with your prejudices, antisemitism, or outright hate! And you do this NOT against Israeli extremists on this talkback, but against the majority of Israelis who clearly KNOW where Israel went wrong, and are critical of it. Coz you don't like Jews in general...

1)"The Palestinians have been subjected to constant terror"(ANY #434) He gets told that Israel does this in response to Pal Arab terrorism and that it wouldn't happen had they disbanded their terrorists in 1948, he says: 2)"You are an Idiot to think that since you won the first round..that they should follow suit and disband their terrorists groups."(ANY in last talkback #166) And what did he mean by the term "the first round"? He meant the formation of the state of Israel. So on the one hand he accuses Israel for causing suffering to the Pal Arabs but when he gets told that it wouldn't happen if the Pal Arab terror organisations would have been disbanded, he responds with 2) above. In other words, he cannot see why Arab terrorism should STOP till the Pal Arabs too achieve their objective, ie DESTROYING Israel. He then gets told that in that case Israel has no option but to respond, he goes back to 1) and complains about Pal Arab suffering. And so he goes on in circles!

It is indeed true that most Israelis have come to accept the idea of a Palestinian state. It can be even a flourishing state if they use their energy in a positive, rational way. But they are not positive and not rational. Alas, they handle according to philosophy of Islam what stresses the fact that worshippers of Allah are Übermenschen. They are not to negotiate with Dhimies but fight them. If they cannot fight the enemy openly, they uses the so called ‘Trojaan tactic’ and invade the country from the inside. The stupid Danes who had let on the elections , yesterday, the New Alliance of Nasser Chader to enter Folketing (Danish Parliament) had taken a great risk. The first thing this ‘moderate Muslim wants, is to bring more of his sort into a country which had granted his parents a better life. .

JES: "For the third time, neither of these are Basic Laws. That`s why the High Court of Justice can and has ruled on them" Very well, JES, I will simply refer to them as Israeli Laws. But before descending into minutae again, I think it would be wise if you and I both say what *we* mean and understand by these two words: CITIZENSHIP NATIONALITY I have a very Western view of what these two words mean, and while the "Israeli" definition of "citizenship" is, I believe, the same as the "Western" definition the "Israeli" definition of "nationality" is very different indeed. What do YOU understand by those two words, JES?

JES: "It seems to me, Johnboy, that you are absolutely wrong on all counts." That would appear to be due to your appalling lack of understanding - or wilfull and malicious misrepresentation - of my arguments, JES. JES: "What baffles me is the level of hubris and conceit required to maintain such an obstinate argument based on a language that you don`t know and a legal system about which your sole familiarity comes from propaganda pages such as the "Jerusalemite" site you previously cited." Still not addressing the OTHER link I gave you in post number #408, I see.... Have you even acknowledged that it exists, JES??

"what about justice for the jews who have wondered the globe for over 2000 years"? how so? you make it sound like the jews are gypsies. truth is that most jews have been sedentary and generally successful in the places they've settled over the last 2000 years. the one big exception of course occured in europe in the years leading up to and during wwII(case in point: gabe1 who lives in canada). "and who have been killed over these 2000 years"? again...how so? the only other exception to the one noted above, is the violence that ensued the zionist takeover of palestinian lands, and the exodus of jews who had lived peacefully in arab countries for generations who were forced to flee for fear of the repercussions brought on by the zionists deeds. otherwise, most jews were...and continue to be...perfectly content in their chosen countries(case in point: guess who gabe?) "we finally return only to have people like you begrudge us our inheritance". "we"? you reside in canada? and where lies "your" claim to inheritance, gabe? and how is it that YOUR inheritance takes precedent over that of those who YOU have displaced, which also dates back 2000 years? there is NO such thing as "justice" for one which results in an "injustice" to another. in most countries where jews reside, they enjoy the same rights and freedoms as non-jews. this is NOT true in israel; which is probably why the majority of the world's jews prefer to remain exactly where they are. it IS unfortunate though, that their reluctance to leave their homeland to immigrate to israel makes so many of them feel an inherent need to support israel to the exclusion of human rights and "justice"; to the point that they become even more zealous than the israelis who witness the injustice first hand! "what about justice for jews", gabe? where?

Why not rename your country "Orwellia", then you can all be "Orwellian". JES says "national land" isn't, it's "state land" instead i.e. "Land Belonging To The State." But that's not "national land" because..? Then JES starts the real obfuscation: JES: "but that does not change the fact that the Basic Law does not create a 'national' right for Jews only to purchase 'national land'." Straw man argument; I made no mention at all of Arab or Jewish PURCHASE of that land. I talked only about how Israeli *LAW* allows Arab EXCLUSION from that land. And it does: Law of Return Law of Citizenship Status Law allows the State to park its "state land" into the care of "Jewish National Institutions", thereby ensuring that some Israeli citizens (non-Jewish nationals) can be EXCLUDED from "state land" while other Israeli citizens (Jewish nationals) can gain EXCLUSIVE use of "state land". How? Coz CITIZENSHIP ain't NATIONALITY in Israel. That's how.

for it will be cartastrophic. No Two peoples with such a history of hate and revenge such as Arabs and Jews can live peacefully 'side by side' in a land which is barely a spot on the map. One must go, either those who have been there for over Three Thousand years or a New Terrorist State whose aim is to wipe the other one out. It is all there on Post 420 which spells the beginnings of a Total World War to avoid the Emancipation of the Free Peoples of the World should they have to live under the Threat of the Sword.

Something does not seem to fit, says Swiss. Well, perhaps you does not fit to understand the complexity of the situation in a country in which you don't and never have lived and whose languages and cultures you don't know?? Also, as I recall, Yael asked you a couple of times a question that you have managed to evade so far: Who gives Erekat or you for that matter the right to determine who and what we, Jews, are and the nature of our nation-state?? I hope this time you will answer me, Yael and the rest of 'am israel. (I know you can not understand this two words phrase, and that is because you are not one of us!)

What's more, the term "le'om" (ethnic affiliation) is not used exclusively for Jews in any sense. I don't know whether you read that or just made it up, but the term "le'om" is used for all national affiliations in Israel ? everyone may have a "le'om" (qawima, in Arabic), or national affiliation. This, I might point out is not at all unusual in states with multi-ethnic populations. For example, most people in Bilbao are Spanish citizens (or nationals) ? i.e. their nationality is "Spanish". However, most of these people are Basques, not Spaniards, by ethnic affiliation. The fact that ETA may demand that they be Basque nationals as well is an entirely separate issue (please excuse the pun).

For the third time, neither of these are Basic Laws. That's why the High Court of Justice can and has ruled on them. Now, turning to your assertions about translations. JB:" NATIONALITY is defined in the Basic Law of Return, and the term used it "le`um", and that is reserved excusively for "Am Yisrael"." Not quite. You have conflated items from two sections of the Law of Return here. First, the term 'am yisrael (nation of Israel) is used only once in the law, in defining who is NOT eligible as one who: "acts against the people (or nation) of Israel?." (official translation uses "Jewish people".) There is only one use of the term le'om (ethnicity, or ethnic affiliation). This is in 3a(a) or the amendment to section 5, and it reads: "No person will be registered as a Jew according to his ETHNIC AFFILIATION (le'omo) or his religion if there is notification according to this law or another document that in the Registry or another public document it is indicated that he is not a Jew?."

Finally, the issue of "national land", and here we are talking about a Basic Law: Israel Lands. This very short law (three, one-sentence clauses) says absolutely nothing about "national land". It talks about state (medina) lands, and all it says is that ownership (i.e. title) of these lands may not be transferred (i.e. to anyone). In other words that they are not on the market. They cannot be sold. The fact that JNF land was attached, under this law, to the state lands and may, therefore, not be sold is a quite separate issue from the fact that the JNF (who holds legal title to these lands) insists that it has the right to decide to whom it leases them. We can argue about whether or not the JNF has this right ? as has been brought before the High Court of Justice ? but that does not change the fact that the Basic Law does not create a "national" right for Jews only to purchase "national land". It seems to me, Johnboy, that you are absolutely wrong on all counts. What baffles me is the level of hubris and conceit required to maintain such an obstinate argument based on a language that you don't know and a legal system about which your sole familiarity comes from propaganda pages such as the "Jerusalemite" site you previously cited.

For the third time, neither of these are Basic Laws. That's why the High Court of Justice can and has ruled on them. Now, turning to your assertions about translations. JB:" NATIONALITY is defined in the Basic Law of Return, and the term used it "le`um", and that is reserved excusively for "Am Yisrael"." Not quite. You have conflated items from two sections of the Law of Return here. First, the term 'am yisrael (nation of Israel) is used only once in the law, in defining who is NOT eligible as one who: "acts against the people (or nation) of Israel?." (official translation uses "Jewish people".) There is only one use of the term le'om (ethnicity, or ethnic affiliation). This is in 3a(a) or the amendment to section 5, and it reads: "No person will be registered as a Jew according to his ETHNIC AFFILIATION (le'omo) or his religion if there is notification according to this law or another document that in the Registry or another public document it is indicated that he is not a Jew?." What's more, the term "le'om" (ethnic affiliation) is not used exclusively for Jews in any sense. I don't know whether you read that or just made it up, but the term "le'om" is used for all national affiliations in Israel ? everyone may have a "le'om" (qawima, in Arabic), or national affiliation. This, I might point out is not at all unusual in states with multi-ethnic populations. For example, most people in Bilbao are Spanish citizens (or nationals) ? i.e. their nationality is "Spanish". However, most of these people are Basques, not Spaniards, by ethnic affiliation. The fact that ETA may demand that they be Basque nationals as well is an entirely separate issue (please excuse the pun).

Empty cans rattle the loudest. And you're making one Hellova' din, JOSH.

Klaudia the remedy is easy if it is to be served to the said parties(not us good rightists) So how about giving them HUMBLE PIE? A very substntial one to last them till next your "fridge" has not been raided by the likes of dana.gee whizz you already mentioned "humble pie"sorry my eyes are hurting from the constant gazing at my monitor... Don't work to hard hear.... By best regards and I wish you all the good things that life an offer you.. Always a pleasure Your friend Kathy

In the shade and make mince meat out of you. Tim confused?hardly,tis is your speciality and you are making a fool of yourelf eachand everyday.firtley with Jeff.N and now trying desperately with Tim R. Go to your shack and do some more research before you utter all the spurious and inane HOG WASH...Asta la vista baby(should I say OLD MAN)??

AY: "Your last sentence is correct. JEWS DON`T IMMIGRATE, THEY RETURN!" One thing we both agree on. AY: "This is the raison d`etre of Zionism and the national narrative of our state." Make that two. I'll give you credit, Avi. You are a proud and honest zionist, and that places you several pegs above such dissembling apologists as JES, Tim R, et al. But back to this article: zionists can describe their state in any way they want; that is one of the perks of being "sovereign". But Other People are only obliged to deal with Israel on the basis of it being a nation; they are not required to "recognize" zionism's own self-description, nor "recognize" its discriminatory theories and practices. Erekat is right; he is required to recognize the State of Israel, and he is required to recognize the GoI as its legitimate govt. But nothing more, and certainly not the theocratic nature of the ruling zionist regime. Why should he, when it's none of his business.

Hey Lal that is a funny name for an "Africaner" eh?No to a Jewish Supremasists State.Boo hoo,we are hardly a Supremasist one,silly dude thinkbefore you open your big mouth,or a fly will get at your gullet and choke you ha ha ha ... Go and join your Muslim brethren,and then come back with your inexcusable shouting... Israel was/is Our country PERIOD!Not like South Africa me ole' chum.Come to think about it the crime rate has gone up,by leaps and bounds since the take over from the whites.You are at the bottom of the pile what with the AIDS Epidemic the monstrous bandits whereby people have to live behind wire fences to keep the lot of you.What hypocrites you all are...

It is a concept that went out the window well over a century ago... AY: "I used the term 'ethnic Jew' because of people like you who seem to think that we are a religious comunity." No. I understand that the Judaic religion is "the religion of the Jews", rather that a Jew being "someone whose religion is Judaism". AY: "Our narrative and our raison d`etre is that we have recreated second Temple Judea without at this juncture, the Temple" Manifest Destiny. There is no legal underpining for that desire except... your desire. AY: "Yes I am a chauvinist and a theocrat as well. I echew the West from a cultural standpoint." That much is obvious, Avi, because the West no longer accepts the concept of Manifest Destiny. You reject the West? Whacko, Avi, I'm very happy for you. So why is Olmert attempting to insist that Erekat accept part of this "vision" within the framework of a thoroughly WESTERN Road Map sponsored by a thoroughly WESTERN Quartet?

JES: "Jews (and others) may immigrate to Israel - under the law - without being naturalized, and they may be granted permanent residence status if they choose not to accept citizenship." Yes, "citizenship". Any Jew who moves to Israel has "citizenship" thrust upon them - indeed, they must explicitely refuse it - and that is not the same thing as "nationality". All Jews everywhere ALREADY possess the required "nationality", because under the Basic Laws Israel does not exist for its citizens but for the "Am Yisrael". Thus it exists for the "Jewish nationals", and there is no "Israeli nationality" at all. Read: http://www.israel.org/MFA/Facts%20About%20Israel/State/Acquisition%20of%20Israeli%20Nationality where this can be seen: it uses the word "Nationality" in the HEADERS, but is careful to use only "citizenship" in the TEXT. In Israel they are not the same thing, and that web site is attempting to obfuscate that fact. As are you.

TR: "Your story is that the Arabs are treated badly by Israel?" Not so much "treated badly" but "treated as inferior", and this treatment is integral to the Basic Laws. TR: "If Israel treats it`s Arab citizens so badly, then how come so many of them want to be Israeli citizens?!" You posted the answer yourself: The Arab Jerusalemites have become aware that upon the assumption of a Palestinian State they can have two bites of the cherry i.e. become a Palestinian national AND continue to be paid social security benefits by the State of Israel. In order to do that they need to assume Israeli citizenship before the final status agreement is reached. They are doing it as way of ripping off Israel, Tim, not as a show of fealty to a state they love. If it were the latter case then they would have taken up citizenship a long, long time ago.

I would say that your logic is absurd, but there is no logic to any of your statements, only ignorance. Jewish supremacist? Do you whine about the Islamic supremacy that runs rampant throughout the Middle East, Northern Africa and Central Asia, a religiously based racism that discriminates against non-Muslims throughout their states and seeks to impose their religion upon others? Do you have anything to say about Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International condemning Arab states for a host of human rights abuses? No, you conveniently miss these facts to indulge your antisemitism. How many hate organizations do you subscribe to? I guess any of them that allow you to vent your hatred of Jews.

T: "Johnboy is one of the most discredited poster" Discredited by whom or by what, TOMY? Your say-so? T: "Not a single accurate statement." Then challenge those statements, TOMY, as people like JES and Tim R actually take the time to do. Don't just say "I don't like what I'm hearing" and stick your fingers in your ears. Doing *that* means leads me to the conclusion that your belief in the moral righteousness of Israel is based entirely on faith, and not at all on reasoning and facts. I'm sure that your "faith" in zionism is strong, TOMY, but if that's all you've got then keep it to yourself, sonny, because you don't add anything to the discussion with posts that amount to nothing but: I don't like what I'm hearing so I will not believe you.

In 1900, Jews made up only 4 per cent of the Palestinian population. All the Jewish immigrants since then were foreign colonisers. They were rightly resisted by the Palestinians, including some of the original Jews. These new immigrants had no right to be there and no right to impose their sovereignty over the land.

The Stern gang, Irgun and Haganah had the objective of creating a majority Jewish population and expelling the majority Arab population, the Palestinians and creating a Jewish state. That is undeniable. Stern Gang; Solve the problem of alien population [i.e. the Arab inhabitants of Palestine] by exchange of population(18 Principles of Rebirth). It is known today, as ethnic cleansing. And things didn`t improve subsequently.-Tim R For who? They certainly didn?t for the Palestinians. Although things have improved significantly for the Israel, financial aid from America and Germany, military and political support for Israeli land annexation (lebensraum) and ethnic cleansing. The land expropriation and expulsion continues unabated today, and Palestinian freedom fighters continue their resistance. So how would you react to that if it was your people who would be subjected to such aggression. Tim R Your comparison is flawed. It is the Israeli?s who have been the aggressor here. If America were the aggressor, in your analogy, I would react and agitate politically to stop it. I am not making a judgment about whether the state of Israel should have been established. In fact I agree that it should be. However, it is your portrayal of history and attempt to conceal your aggression by placing the blame on the Palestinians that is morally indefensible. The methods and practices employed by both sides are less than the honorable in many cases. It is the legacy of these methods that have created the problems today, and the continuation of those policies beyond the point that they are justifiable given the need for a Jewish state, and a Palestinian state. But it is the shameless greed that the Israeli?s have exhibited, taking advantage of the worlds acknowledgement that they should have a state. They want that and more. In doing so, they have moved from being victim to victimizer. Tim R , in any discussion of history it is best to be honest. You have not been so far, nor are you capable of doing so.

JES: "(Further, I don't know what you're talking about when you cite the 'Status Law'.)" http://www.geocities.com/savepalestinenow/israellaws/fulltext/jewishagencystatuslaw.htm I will retract the statement that the Status Law is a part of the Basic Law of Israel. It is not. It is, however, a necessary adjunct to the Basic Laws, because it is the mechanism by which the State can carry out the discriminatory practices made possible by the weird and wonderful definitions of CITIZENSHIP and NATIONALITY that are found in the Law of Citizenship and the Law of Return. The Status Law allows the State to control public institutions like the WZO/JA and use them to carry out discriminatory policies, whilst denying that it is the State that is carrying out those discriminatory policies. Zionists! Not only racist, but ashamed and furtive about their racism. It's not a good look, JES.

I hate to see the cruel and unjust treatment of the Palestinians by Israel."(Boycott) And how would you react if your people would be subjected to constant terrorism for nearly 100 years? First because they wanted to prevent your people to achieve self determination and subsequently because they wanted to destroy your country? ?Tim R The Palestinians have been subjected to constant terror for the same period, Particularly the last 40 years which is way out of proportion to anything that Israel has endured during the same period of time. Further, you come into a country with an indigenous majority Arab population. Take their land and expel them from the country that you are going to create. Then you make a claim that they are the aggressor. And Boycott, a lot of Israelis died because of their aggression. About 1% of Israelis died in the 1948 war of independence alone! That would be equivalent to 3 million American deaths for a war that the Jews didn`t want but were forced to fight. ?Tim R Had the indigenous Arab population meekly surrendered their land to the peace loving Jews and moved away, all this trouble could have been avoided, right? Those Arabs are so unreasonable and troublesome. Reality check, the Arabs were forced to fight the Jews, who were forcing themselves into the country, to create a Jewish state and expel them. So the Jews in turn were forced to fight the Arabs who would not accommodate them and leave. So the Arabs were forced to fight; etc., etc. Also, Tim R, your references to American deaths are repugnant as you are not American and use American deaths for your selfish, unprincipled, and shameless purposes. Your statements are more repulsive because your views of American deaths are manipulative and callous. You mention this to obfuscate the issue. A correct comparison would be Palestinian deaths. You are ahead by 10 to 1 so far. Not only that you have conquered all the land. I have to admire you, for so shamelessly, in light of your success, to attempt portray yourself as an innocent victim. Bravo!

Zionism is, of course, well practiced at it. JES: "There is not obfuscation in the translation of 'ezrahut'."..."This term means BOTH citizenship AND nationality" Noooooo, it doesn't. CITIZENSHIP is defined in the Basic Law of CITIZENSHIP, and the term used is "ezrahut". NATIONALITY is defined in the Basic Law of Return, and the term used it "le'um", and that is reserved excusively for "Am Yisrael". That this is true - and your claim is deceptive - was proven by the Israel High Court of Justice in 1972, when it decided that non-Jews cannot qualify for nationality rights in the state of Israel by ruling that there is no Israeli nation separate from the Jewish people. It is also empirically demonstrated by the manner in which the State of Israel can EXCLUDE Arab Israelis (Israeli citizens) from "national land". "National land" is for "nationals", and that "nationality" is defined as "Jewish nationals", because "Israeli nationality" doesn't exist in the Basic Laws.

"fighting was caused by the Palestinians trying to resist the slow invasion of their lands by foreign Jewish immigrants"(Boycott) That's true too except the bit that it was "Their Land" BECAUSE THAT BIT IS NOT TRUE! The fact is that Palestine wasn't ruled by Arabs for over 1000 years! So it wasn't Arab land although Arabs lived there but JEWS LIVED THERE TOO. So at best, it was a land that was BOTH Arab AND Jewish. Moreover, there wasn't ONLY Jewish immigration to the land but Arabs immigrated there too from neighbouring countries. The fact that from the late 1800s onwards, Jewish immigratin was greater is immaterial, both peoples had A RIGHT to immigrate to Palestine. So, you see Boycott, my points of #355 still stand. As you admit, the Arabs started and continued this war against the Jewish people and as you can see, their claims were NOT valid. All they had a claim to is to a state side by side with Israel and Israel DID AGREE to that in 1948, but the Pal Arabs wanted IT ALL!

Palestinians. What a wonder it is to read such truthful lines. Thanks Bradley Burston.

"Surely you know that history did not begin in 1948, and that there was sporadic fighting between Jews and Palestinians for twenty years before then?"(Boycott) You are absolutely right, history didn't start in 1948. Let's just take a peek into the mid 1800s: Jews lived side by side with Arabs. In fact, in Jerusalem, the Jews were an oppressed majority. My #204 in the following talkback outlines how the Jews were oppressed and how they were at the bottom of the heap. And that was even before Zionism was conceived by Herzl: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/920533.html And Hebron was another place where Jews lived continuously for thousands of years until in 1929 they were massacred and ethnically cleansed by Pal Arabs.

You thought they were simply mindless savages, I take it? PSM: "Hamas has an agenda in case you have missed it" The reunification of all the Mandate territory into one single Islamic nation. Yeah, I got that. PSM: "is NO peace under any circumstances and they fire missiles into Israel daily" No, you didn't. You think they are mindless savages. They want a ONE STATE SOLUTION. They are seeking to achieve that in steps. They are willing to settle in the first step for an Islamic nation ONLY in the occupied territories, and are willing to settle for that with a 10 year Hudna. Israel isn't even willing to accept that, and so the fight is joined. But THAT is what the current fight is about, PETER.

...BOTH of the articlies that I linked to in my earlier post, and not just exclusively to the article by Qumsiyeh.

What about Greece as a Greek supremacy state. What about Turkey as a Turkish supremacy state or for that matter any of the Arab states as Arab supremacy states. Forty years ago one could hear in Cairo the cries. Urubati! Urubati! (My Arabism! My Arabism!) Why can'Jews have Jewish supremacy in their homeland, Israel?

get over it. the palestinains had no choice. imagine if the black south africans accepted the whiteness of South Africa. that's what you are asking the Palestinians to do, to sign off on a jewish supremacist state. who in their right mind would do such a thing?

peter I didn't see the CAPS as yet,but he does not give in poor old man.He says to Jes: Since I don`t read Hebrew I`ll rely on you to compare them and decide if the translation is, indeed, inaccurate.What? poor Jhonny.Doesn't read hebrew?How remiss of him. You know peter,I don't read his at all,and wonder how our Jeff N puts up with such piffle and Jeff does it with his outmost patience and in the end wins.Does "J" conceeds?not on your life.Like a dog with a bone.I garner these I do not read,by the headlines alone,and that's good enough for my taste..Hey,I like the title videogameboy.Why?Firstly I went up and down several weeks ago to see who the blazes he was? and came back empty handed no such person. Then oopps!now I know....

...and not quite accurate. Actually there was violence - mostly perpetrated by Arabs against Jews for more than 50 years before 1948 - largely fomented by families who were, at the same time, selling land at above market prices to Jews. In 1900, the Mufti of Jerusalem declared that the Jewish immigrants should be terrorized and expelled from Palestine. Jewish settlements were attacked in 1921 and, again, in 1929. During the latter riots, the Jewish communities of Hebron and Kfar Silwan were ethnically cleansed of Jews. Ironically, neither of these communities were Zionist. If you actually study the history of Zionism, you will find that up until that time, a large proportion of the Yishuv favored a binational - not a Jewish - state.

Avi I took you to be a follower of this Jhonny.But now I see you are standing your ground and am glad I read these two posts of yours. Thank You

and coming from outside of the Mideastern area, it can be vouched that no truer word could have been said by the author Bradlay Burston. Congratulations Mr. Burston.

poster and a leech as well. I asked once why the "boy" bit? additionally I said:he must be living in a "shack"with just a Computer to keep him company poor OLD MAN THAT HE IS.All the informations he gets are convoluted garnered from dubious sites and lies through his teeth. What I cannot understand is Jeff Northridge arguing with him and with great patience too.But,Jeff wins everytime.John is too conceited to give in and tries to underscore Jeff but NOT A CHANCE IN HELL. What is annoying is the space given to him by Haaretz.I suppose it helps Haaretz as they say "money for old rope" eh TOMY?

and 'Never the twain shall Meet' and that is how it should be, with two such different peoples with different ideals, different outlooks, different mentalities, different... different...different... and they are bound by some indefineable, vague, and imperceptible bond that it seems unlikely that these two should ever come together. Alas, the impossible becomes possible when the Jewish Homeland has been considered the most likely to give away part of itself to a homeless Arab peoples for their Future Proposed State called Palestine. The Arab peoples who would call themselves Palestinians should be joyous for with one 'whoop'! from one of their Sympathetic Friends they hope that in the not too distant future they will have a booming, flourishing, fully accommodated State in their hands. Good Fortune for the Palestinians... but a CRIME for that 4000 year old Jewish State - Good-bye. And Why? All because of OIL.

Surely you know that history did not begin in 1948, and that there was sporadic fighting between Jews and Palestinians for twenty years before then? This fighting was caused by the Palestinians trying to resist the slow invasion of their lands by foreign Jewish immigrants who publicly claimed that they were planning on creating a sovereign Jewish state. The initial aggression was Zionist. Jews and Arabs had lived side by side in Palestine for centuries without fighting.

poster.Not a single accurate statement. Lieing,twistig,and intentional ignorance should qualify him persona non grata.

The laws that you and Qumsiyeh list are not Basic Laws. I am not being pedantic here. The Basic Laws, along with the Declaration of Independence, form the constitutional basis upon which the Supreme Court judges all other laws and government acts. Qumsiyeh is pulling a sleight of hand here by trying to raise these to the level of constitutional laws, which they are not. (Further, I don?t know what you?re talking about when you cite the ?Status Law?.) There is not obfuscation in the translation of ?ezrahut?. Qumsiyeh, and others, pull another sleight of hand. This term means BOTH citizenship AND nationality (in the sense that both Arab and Jewish citizens of Israel are Israeli nationals, which is what the Law on Nationality is talking about). You might do me the honor of actually reading my earlier post in which I explained the difference between ?ezrahut? and ?la?om?, the latter meaning ?ethnic affiliation? or ?ethnicity?, but sometimes translated as ?nationality?. The translation of the term ?ezrahut? by the MFA as ?nationality? is perfectly accurate, and not obfuscation as Qumsiyeh asserts.

It is very refreshing to read such an article from an Haaretz correspondent. I couldn't have said it better. Very good report!

Thanks for the invite and the "good intentions." I would be happy just to accept a cup of coffee from you, if I were sure your blend was the result of fair trade (I won't hold my breath).

Seems to me there is a rash of simplistic thinking going on here with you, Big D. If your only litmus test for deciding who is Left and who is Right is where they stand on the issue of Israel and the Palestinians, then you're engaging in one-dimensional thinking. Do you ever stop to think about where people stand on various other socio-economic and cultural issues, where the labels of Right and Left also apply, or do you just look at their opinions on Israel and the Arabs? The Arab-Israel issue is one issue out of many, a small nook in an overall large house. I noticed that you were practically absent from this board until you asked me your question, and now that it's been answered you have hidden yourself again (quite rightly). Tell, Big D, is Swiss (Dino) still your hero?! "Fair and Balanced."

Videogameboy is upset by the notion that Jews return to Israel and tries on the petard of legalese to pout and stamp his foot about it. Another of the famous two-legged chairs that videogameboy likes to erect before assuming the aura of moral outrage as he huffs and puffs, carefuly trying to avoid sitting on this chair that would tip over and collapse. Alas poor videogameboy turns crimson at the thought of the Jewish State of Israel....and that is supposed to concern who????? ohhhh that's right videogameboy wants a do-over, partition never happened, the war didn't achieve the desired results.... ohhhh yeahhh let's do it again, and again, and again till they get it right.

Your last sentence is correct. JEWS DON'T IMMIGRATE, THEY RETURN! This is the raison d'etre of Zionism and thenational narrative of our state.

I used the term 'ethnic Jew' because of people like you who seem to think that we are a religious comunity. I obviously disagree with you. Our narrative and our raison d'etre is that we have recreated second Temple Judea without at this juncture, the Temple, I would have loved to call our state 'Judea' instead of 'Israel' and I remember being very dissapointed when I heard that it wasn't. However one of the reasons cited was because the heart land of judea was alloted to the Arab state (not yet Palestinians) and the powers that be wanted to avoid suspicions of irredentist tendencies by the international community so we suficed with the tat portion of Judea that was added to our kingdomby the Hasmoneans Hyrcanus and and Alexander Yannai between 103 and 94 BCE. The war of Indepenence gave us the corridor to Jerusalem and half of Jerusalem itself. The 1967 war gave us the rest of Jerusalem. Yes I am achauvinist and a theocrat as well. I echew the West from a cultural standpoint.

Hamas has an agenda in case you have missed it.It is NO peace under any circumstances and they fire missiles into Israel daily. You fire a whole lot of chaff in the air hoping to cover the real issue Israeli citizens by the millions are NOT Jewish with equal rights under the law. Still waiting for the Israeli constitution you have talked so knowlegdeably about. Johnboy following the maxim "if you cannot dazzle them with science baffle the with b.s." Failing that there is always the outburst of obscenities to cover a non post isn't there.?

PSM: "Isael is negotiating with the Pals.The Qassems are coming from the Pals.in Gaza to achieve their aims by force." You really believe, do you, that Hamas are attempting the CONQUEST of Israel via these rockets? Really? PSM: "Every Israeli citizen Johnboy,every Israeli citizen,can mount legal challenges in Israel they can,they do and they win." That is engaging in "the body politic", and that is a feature of CITIZENSHIP. All people in Israel have a right to Israeli CITIZENSHIP, PETER. What I am pointing out is that there is an entire gamit of other rights and privileges that are not granted according to CITIZENSHIP, but to a Orwellian definition of "nationality" that DENIES IN LAW that there is an "Israeli nationality", but instead a "Jewish nationality" and a plethera of "non-Jewish nationalities". Nothing you have posted refutes that, mainly because you do not understand the issues involved. But then again, ignorance has always been bliss for you.

JES: "Exactly which of the Basic Laws are you referring to? None of the laws that you mention are part of the Basic Laws. I believe I mentioned them: Status Law Law of Return Law of Citizenship I have culled my information from these sources: http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/0/055b10221b100adcc12569ea004b94c4?Opendocument http://www.jerusalemites.org/articles/english/2007/febraury/151.htm Tim R has pointed to this: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/State/Acquisition+of+Israeli+Nationality.htm Tho' I believe that this is one of the links mentioned as being: "mistranslated in English to obfuscate the separation in the Hebrew text between 'Ezrahut' (Citizenship) and being a member of 'Am Yisrael' (the people of Israel, referring to all Jews anywhere)." Since I don't read Hebrew I'll rely on you to compare them and decide if the translation is, indeed, inaccurate. I will, of course, trust you to make an honest and thorough appraisal.

S: "The passport shows Nationality: Israeli. That`s to make things simple for smart aleks like you." And Abbas opens his passport and it says....what, S? And Abdullah Abdullah of East Jerusalem opens his passport and it says....what, S? Passports are not official documents "proving" your nationality; they are documentation to help you cross the highways and byways between nations, S. Don't confuse the two. What MAKES an "Israeli" an "Israeli" is what is found in the Basic Laws. And what are found in those Basic Laws, S? Why, there are two descriptors to be found: 1) "Ezrahut", which means "citizenship". It is not a description of an "Israeli nationality" 2) "Am Yisrael", which means "the people of Israel", which means "ALL JEWS EVERYWHERE". There is nothing in the Basic Laws that describes an "Israeli nationality"; it simply does not exist in Israeli law, despite what is stamped on your passport. Coz a passport is simply a travel document, S.

why not rename israel and call it THE JEWISH STATE OF ISRAEL? LIKE THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN

Your story is that the Arabs are treated badly by Israel? Then how do you explain the following STRANGE PHENOMENON which was reported by Haaretz a few days ago? "Israel reports jump in Jerusalem Arabs seeking Israeli citizenship: The number of East Jerusalem residents seeking Israeli citizenship has risen sharply in recent months, an Israeli official said Wednesday, as talk of a possible re-division of the city gains momentum.... The trend appears to stem from Palestinian fears that they could lose Israeli social benefits, such as health care or welfare payments, if their neighborhoods are shifted to Palestinian control in the future..."(Haaretz 07/11/2007) If Israel treats it's Arab citizens so badly, then how come so many of them want to be Israeli citizens?!

The so called "Jewish Nationality" once was shown on identity cards. NO LONGER. THIS THING DOES NOT EXIST ON ANY IDENTITY DOCUMENTS.The passport shows Nationality: Israeli. That's to make things simple for smart aleks like you.

of the Basic Laws are you referring to? None of the laws that you mention are part of the Basic Laws.

Since when does an immigration law have to cover naturalization? Jews (and others) may immigrate to Israel - under the law - without being naturalized, and they may be granted permanent residence status if they choose not to accept citizenship. In fact, even Jews who immigrate to Israel under the Law of Return are only granted citizenship following three years of residence if they hold citizenship in another state. Only those who do not have any other citizenship are automatically granted Israeli citizenship upon arrival.

Ari; Why do you hate me so much? What harm have I done to OUR state of Israel?

The Mosques you mention here are in by Arabs inhabited places and under their supervision. The Al Aqsa arceological diggings are performed by Moslems. Jordan has been financing the repairs in Al Aqsa, among others its new golden coupole. Nevertheless, I am grateful to you two for providing me with this info. I myself am a Jerusalimite, but am interested now to look into the facts around this info elsewhere in Israel, you gave. Thanks.

And so you say it's YOUR Country consequently you can take the Law into your own hands.Have you read the Holy Bible, the Gospels/Testaments? It seems not because you would not be speaking so arrogantly if you knew the authentic History of the Middle East. Indeed, those massive desert sands ARE your country.... but there is a little coastline which was there for thousands of years even before the Christ Era which was the Homeland of someone other than you, a fourishing and developed country ruled by the Romans when Bedouins were still living among the desert sands ........

Why is a Jewish Israel a problem to you but not a Moslem or an Islamist Palestine?

We want separation, not "negotiation". What's to negotiate? Our Jewish nationality? Separation NOW!

Thanks for your comments I appreciate your words. I have two main reasons for providing more detailed responses to people like Dana: 1. I am appalled at their attempts to present this conflict in cartoonish terms. In fact, I think that they (the Danas of this world) are NOT proponents of peace, as they claim, because their simplistic claims only perpetrates confrontation. 2. my belief is that their aim is to bring the discussions down to the lowest common denominator because from that position, those who are ill informed see only two sides hurling insults at each other so hey cannot differentiate and they cannot make an informed decision. I really do believe that overall Israel is more in the right, hence I feel that it's in our interest not to miss an opportunity to present as logical a case as possible for Israel. I must admit though that there is one guy in this talkback who did manage to get under my skin and bring the worst out in me, he knows who he is!

Disaster has already befallen us in 1929,1935, 1967,1973 and these disasters have all been caused by our neighbours-THE PEACE LOVING ARABS. Some of them even live in Israel as we speak.

The UK is a Christian constitutional monarchy, with H M The Queen as Head of both Church and State. It is also a democrcacy. Israel is a Jewish state, and also a democracy. What's the problem. In the Islamic world there is theoretically no separation of religion and state, although in practice this varies.

I've been there, and it talks about "nationality" and "citizenship" as if they are the same thing. Under the Israeli Basic Laws: Status Law Law of Citizenship Law of Return they are NOT the same thing at all. Anyone who has "Israeli citizenship" - Jew and non-Jew - has equal rights to anything that is the RIGHT OF CITIZENS. But your CITIZENSHIP does not give you rights to all the institutions of the State, because there is a "supra-citizenship" status that is cynically called "nationality", and it confers rights and privileges only to those with "Jewish nationality" Not only that, but these national institutions claim to represent ALL JEWS EVERYWHERE, and that claim is given a legal imprimatur under Israeli Law. TR: "Jewish immigration is favoured as a matter of policy" Simply incorrect: the Law of Return is NOT an immigration law, because it does NOT involve naturalization; it is a discriminatory nationality law. JEWS SIMPLY DON'T IMMIGRATE. THEY "RETURN".

What about justice for the Jews who have wondered the globe for over 2000 years and who have been killed over these 2000 years. We finally return only to have people like you begrudge us our inheritance. ERIC, WHAT ABOUT JUSTICE FOR THE JEWS.

but the post i was responding to had responded to a comment about religion... not about my political party...or yours, or about my government...or yours, and i'm not a member of a video club...but i know it didn't include yours, and i did not specify an eastern or western religion, or one that is large or small... and i certainly did not exempt mine... i made a general statement about religion...ALL religions... and if you don't believe my statement...then ask youself why it is that the three major divisions of religion that are based in the old testament of the bible are the ones most consistently at odds with each other? and please don't insult my intelligence by pretending that islam is the only one in conflict with any other like maria does. i think i'll stick by what i said... no offense intended.

You and Kath would always be my honored guests for Lunch or dinner whenever you are in Toronto. MY E-Mail is Hanem52003@Yahoo.ca I am sure I could spend hours with either of you having some intelligent converstaion on a large number of topics. I and my wife would even be glad to host you at our house.

Whether Palestine wants to grant it or not ? Can we have that loud and clear? Ditto for any other country.? Otherwise its racist isn't it? Tell us that your position on future immigration to Palestine? Are you agitating for Sudanese to get Arab citizenship in any of the Arab countries?

eric, justice is blind did you not know ?? but then so are you!!!

BB sounds utterly desperate. These are the words of a spoilt child having a tantrum because he knows he can't have every thing his own way. He's seriously deluded, either that or he hopes if he writes it down it will come true.

Quoting 365JB: Islamic Republic that came about by a peaceful unification of two countries... What do you mean by that? Which 2 countries? One of them Israel? And what Islamic country or Islamic unification was ever peaceful? In modern times? Or Does Hamas promise to unify the 2 countries between the river and the sea by peaceful means only?

Isael is negotiating with the Pals.The Qassems are coming from the Pals.in Gaza to achieve their aims by force. Tell me where you read the Israeli constitution ? Every Israeli citizen Johnboy,every Israeli citizen,can mount legal challenges in Israel they can,they do and they win.Another of your selective omissions to create your specious "facts". Then you go on to accept an Islamic republic,did you miss the news in Gaza yesterday,peaceful unification?depends on your selective vision and blind spots doesn't it?

Coming in rather late and perusing this interesting Debate, and to point out in Poster 3 a slight misjudgment in my opinion quoting you "The Palestinian view is 'what is mine is mine' and "What's yours..... is mine as well" at least according to the Arab point of view with regard to Land in the Middle East. What is a sorry mistake is that many of the Mid-Easterners are not well versed in their own history and believe wholeheartedly in what they are told, especially the youth. It is a pity for innocence breeds much contempt.

I know that Israel is exceptionally good at it, JES, but indulging in an Olwellian blizzard of newspeak does not change the underlying facts: There is "Israeli citizenship", and all Israeli citizens enjoy the equal rights *that* *are* *available* *to* *citizens*. But "citizenship" does not confer "national" rights upon those citizens; you must have the right nationality, and that "nationality" is ethnically based: there is a "Jewish nationality", and there are various "Non-Jewish nationalities", and the former have rights that are unavailable to the latter, and ANY JEW ANYWHERE can come into Israel and obtain those rights AS A RIGHT OF THEM ALREADY POSSESSING "A JEWISH NATIONALITY". That division of economic, social and cultural rights is theocratically based, JES, and you can wave your passport at me as much as you want and it will not change that simple fact. THAT'S what Olmert is insisting that Erekat "recognize" and, quite rightly, Erekat is having none of it.

Dr. Brnd, as several posters have mentionned, there is far too much (emotional) outcry in Israel, after Erekats statement. As I stated before, it was dumb from him to unnecessarly "provoke" the Israelis with that kind of stuff, a few weeks ahead of Annapolis. But it was simply a tactical move. I have not the slightest doubt that Erekat + Co. have accepted the concept of Israel as a Jewish state for quite some time now, but they aren't prepared to say it publicly before a deal with Israel has been reached. And anyway, even if they wouldn't accept it (again, which I don't believe...), with a 2 state solution and a strict seperation of the 2 people they simply have no way to interfer into Israels political and demographic landscape. A possibility they certainly would have, if Israel follows the further "entangling" with the Palestinian Arabs through settlement expansion, as demanded by the right in Israel.

this would be the ideal state,a jewish state which has the president jewish, the prime mininster Ishmaiel hanieyah(palestinian),the state name is Israel, with pals and jews live in peace and harmony,this is the only solution. Pals will accept that, but the jewish people will not accept that, see now who is racist?

"The Arabs cannot give up their "trump" card which is recognizing the Jewish state of Israel, yet Israel is expected to give up her "trump" card of refusing to talk until such recognition is given". Well, Peter, could there be a more revealing statement why Israel has been diplomaticly so "successful" in dealing with her Palestinian neighbours over the past years...??? There is a saying in Switzerland: "The smart guy gives in, the donkey stops dead in his tracks". Do you want Israel to be the smart guy or the donkey...??? You know, I mean it wouldn't really be a bad thing, if the (true) democracy Israel would be able to differentiate herself once in a while (in a positive sense...) from some of the extremists in her Arab neighbourhood. I mean, just once in a while, for a change....

I, too, say why bother. In particular, I have no patience whatever with superficial show-offs. Thank you very much for all your posts. Best regards, Cipora

So OK Ha'Aretz don't censor d'vrey Torah but at least censor the words of that racist IDIOT from Durban S.Africa who causes so much harm to our State of ISRAEL. More than any Palestinian or other Anti Semite ever could

of being born Jewish and heirs to the 'House of Abraham' while the son born out of wedlock from an Egyptian hand-maiden sheds his vengeance. This is a Terrible Crime to the Arab world and today, thousands of years after, because of Sarah's good heart and foolishness, one of Abraham's descendants are paying the price.

You do not speak for all of Sweden as my Jewish Swedish mother would say. You have answered nothing and have given nothing in response to my statements. Your response is hate filled and slanderous full with half truths and rhetoric of a Muslim. Your references to Palestinian presence in Palestine, What Palestine? You do not have the ability to answer the statements and questions I have made because there is only one answer. Hebrews, the Israelites, the Jewish people are and do have historical claim to Israel and have had a presence in Israel for 1000s of years. I will say it again, Arabs of Palestine did not have a temple, they did not have currency, and they did not have a government. Palestinian Arabs have no ancient historical claims to Palestine, simply because a Palestinian Arab nation did not exist even 100 years ago. There was never an independent country called Palestine End Arab occupation of Israel. Levi.

Do you think that Saddam used WMDs on the Kurds because of Israel? Do you think that Pakistan acquired nuclear bombs because of Israel? Do you really think that Iran wants nuclear weapons because of Israel? The problem with antisemites like you is that you have no capacity for logical reasoning. Of course, if you did have such capacity, you would not be an antisemite. p.s. no one, says that all jews belong in israel. nor are all jews israelis. in order for a jew to become israeli, he/she, actually has to emigrate to israel.

The world is sick and tired of the endless Israeli ? Palestinian conflict. As neither party to the conflict has the power to annihilate completely its opponent (and hopefully, the world would not permit a Hitlerian style ?final solution? to either party of the dispute) then, the only rational resolution is to reach a final agreement under the auspices and control of the United Nations. Therefore, the following unbiased proposal for a ?peaceful, final, and fair resolution? of the Israeli ? Palestinian conflict should be considered. Given that proliferation of nuclear weapons is constantly increasing, it will be in the best long term interest of Israel to come to a definite peaceful agreement: 1 internally, with the Palestinians, 2 externally, with the bordering Arab states (Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt), 3 regionally with the Moslem world (Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Emirates, etc.), before it becomes impossible to achieve any long-term ?peaceful solution?. Considering that over time, the superiority of Israel in nuclear capability will begin to diminish vs. its adversaries, as they are likely to obtain access to nuclear arms themselves, (from such sources as Pakistan, China, Russia, etc.), therefore, in order to prevent a horrible nuclear confrontation in the Middle East, Israel would be well advised to negotiate a peaceful, final and fair resolution of all outstanding problems with the Palestinians and the bordering or regional Moslem states, as soon as possible, by: 1 Reaching agreement with the Palestinians, residing in both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, for the creation of an independent, viable Palestinian State, that would incorporate these territories with a connecting land corridor (similar to one that existed between West Germany and West Berlin, before unification). 2 Compensating the former Palestinian residents (or their surviving descendants) for the properties and assets lost by them in 1948, when expelled (or escaped in fear for their lives) into the surrounding Arab states at the time of the War for the creation of the State of Israel. With a fair compensation, these former Palestinian residents could resettle into the new, yet to be created, Palestinian State or emigrate elsewhere, but by accepting fair compensation, would give up the claim for a ?right of return to Israel?. 3 Offering to the Palestinians, (who still live within Israel proper), fair compensation for their properties and assets, provided they resettle into the new, yet to be created, Palestinian State or emigrate elsewhere, but by accepting fair compensation, would give up any claim for a ?right of return to Israel?. Hopefully, this way, the Middle East crisis could finally be diffused with: 1 Israel achieving its implied objective of becoming and remaining basically a purely Jewish state within its secure and internationally recognized borders, and 2 The Palestinians, getting their own independent, viable State, while obtaining fair compensation for lost properties and assets, or alternatively, gaining the opportunity to resettle elsewhere in the region or the world at large.

Go to this site and see for yourself: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Facts+About+Israel/State/Acquisition+of+Israeli+Nationality.htm There are only Israeli citizens in Israel be it Arab Israelis or Jewish Israelis or any other citizens. And unless it relates to security issues, they are all subject to the same laws. In practice, Jewish immigration is favoured as a matter of policy. I don't believe that's different to the attitudes of many countries. If a Russian wishes to return to Russia or a Greek to Greece, they too are given favourable treatment over non Russians/Greeks. Since Israel is the ONLY Jewish state in the world and since it's whole purpose was to serve as a sanctuary for persecuted Jews, it's even more understandable for israel. If anyone has a problem with the concept of Israel as a sanctuary, then they should have organised history differently. Perhaps if Jews would not have been subjected to so many persecutions, things could be different..

It's our country - and we'll call it what we want. Why, they call Glasgow, 'The friendly city' though many would dispute that. It doesn't mean that unfriendly people can't and don't live there.

We recognised you the first time you were here. Your attitude hasn't changed and nor has your message. You're wasting our time.

i do believe that i take offense over this comment...for i wish no ill; not on israel OR the palestinians. what i WISH for is justice for the palestinians...which over the last 60 years or so they have yet to see. that's what I wish for...whether that justice comes by way of returning to them ALL of what WAS pre-1967 for their own "state" entity, or whether it be by israel incorporating THEM into a secular "israeli" society that includes those territories... and quite frankly...i personally believe that the latter...over the long term...would actually strengthen israel as country, and enhance the lives of all involved. it's what i believe SHOULD have been from the beginning. but of course...MY thoughts immediately make me an "ill-wisher" to more than just a few; and an "anti-semite", too...neither of which i am. but in case you question that; i want to point out one thing: there was a time that my country, and countless others around the world, chose to look the other way rather than to confront an injustice. and i'm not saying that israel's injustice towards the palestinians will ever result in anything even remotely similar to what happened back then. but neither did anyone back then ever dream where that injustice might lead. so you may think of me as you will, and you may call me as you like; but i'll still remain to try your conscience just the same...because as a human who possesses one, it's as much a duty as it is my right. have nice day

The uses and abuses of power exist in all institutions and organisations, including governments, large and small, eastern and western. Why limit it to religion? Your own country, your own political party, your own religion and your own video club, online or offline are just as manipulable as any other.

This talkback is about the right of Jews to have self determination in the same way that Russians and Greeks who are Russian Orthodox and greek Orthodox respectively are allowed to have self determination. Or are you saying that just because they might have laws that one is critical of, that would diqualify them from their right to self determination? Because that's what your attitude sounds like with regards to Israel. Personally, as a secular Jew, I too am critical of some of Israel's laws imposed by the religious on the non religious. But that does not disqualify Jews rights for self determination. And that self determination means that Israel has the right to impose laws that safeguard it's demographics as a Jewish state. After all, most countries, Russia and Greece included would not allow themselves to be overtaken by a population of non Russians/Greeks, especially if those non Russians/Greeks would be from countries with whom they have been fighting a continuous war!

Gotta dash. Kath has opened up an aroma therapy shop next door. She's ministering to all the leftists who are feeling rather nauseous after their ingestion of crow.This is her nature, and I bless her for it. I hear she works wonders with essential oils and a goodly dose of Alka Selzer. After this hectic day, I could use a whiff of lavendar myself. I know Kath is rushed off her feet but I'm confident she'll squeeze me in anyway. Then I'm gonna grab Kath by the hand and drag her away from all this . We'll meet up with Gabe for a soothing candlelight dinner. We'll be dining on sumptious food instead of scrawny old leftist crow. Although, by the looks of things, my own stomach is a little off,what with the PETA problems and all . So I may turn out to be a cheap date . A little broth, a light salad... we'll see.

Indeed it is. Israel is free to conduct its internal affairs as it sees fit, tho I'll point out that what Israel SAYS and how it BEHAVES are often very different things indeed. My PROBLEM is this: while Israel's current zionist regime has the right to create a discriminatory (and quite theocratic) quasi-constitution, it does not have the right to insist that anyone else sanctify that policy by "recognizing" that THE REGIME IS THE STATE AND THE STATE IS THE REGIME. PSM: "No problems with a Palestinian state have you?" No, none. Why should I? PSM: "Not even with the Islamic Republic of Palestine from the river to the sea as ennunciated by the elected govenment of Palestine Hamas." If they attempted to achieve that by force, PETER, then, yes, I would have a big problem with it. But an Islamic Republic that came about by a peaceful unification of two countries? Why would I have any objection to that?

First of all, you are relying on translations, because apparently your understanding of Hebrew isn't up to the same level as your understanding of Farsi. There are two terms translated into "nationality" that have very different meanings in Hebrew. One is "ezrahut", which is often translated into "citizenship". If I look in my passport, my "ezrahut" is listed as the equivalent of "nationality". All Israeli citizens are also Israeli nationals. The second term, which is sometimes translated as "nationality" is "le'om", however, this does not have the meaning "nationality" as listed, for example, in my passport. "Le'om" has more the meaning of ethnic affiliation, and it is very different from what you identify as "nationality". Your second error is in your assumption that "Israeli Jews and Disapora Jews alike have superior rights to "other nationalities" under the Basic Laws, even if when those "other nationalities" are Israelis and those Diaspora Jews are not." Simply not the case. Diaspora Jews do not have any specific rights in Israel unless, and until, they become citizens. They do have preference in being granted citizenship, but this is something shared by many other democratic and secular states, including Ireland, Germany and Greece. (In the latter case, baptism in the Greek Orthodox Church is even stated as one of the criteria of determining the "Greekness" of an applicant.)

all you need is to be a bit open-minded, and basically not blinded by what you percieve as your right for the mere reason that it is YOURS. others have rights too, but you fail to see them. they can back their rights with evidence that might have more legs than yours; but still, the greedy human's ultimate falacy prevails: it is MINE, and the underlying rationale is that it is ME. does it even scratch your head, the idea that those who used to live in what is now YOUR land (and which has been for thousands of years according to your God) are now stateless? does it occur to you that there are millions of those? do you have a tiny teeni sense of the confusion those have to go through every time they fill up an application and come to the slot where they should fill their citizinship? I wonder what value do archaeological digs and history hold to entitle you to deprive others their right to live with dignity.

AY: "We are now talking about ethnic Jews who`s homeland was originally Judea..." What's a "non-ethnic Jew"? AY: "who recreated their Jewish homeland and called it 'Israel'," They created the nation they were entitled to under Res 181. That is not a "recreation" of the biblical Kingdom of Israel; it's a new state that adopted a very old name. AY: "and ethnic Arabs who want to build a state in historic Eretz Israel and call it Palestine." What's a "non-ethnic Arab"? They want to create the nation they were entitled to under Res 181, on a stub of the land that was originally allocated for that purpose. That this land used to belong to a long-gone biblical kingdom is irrelevent: it does not give THIS Israel the right to insist that the Pals recognize the theocratic nature of the current zionist regime, nor to dictate the nature of the regime the Pals propose for Palestine. You do appear to be remarkably chauvanistic, Avi..

when your christian right runs out of muslims to hate; and turns their hate back towards the jews where it's always been, historically? you know...before al qaida reared its ugly head and redirected the hatred of your evangelist friends. i'm just curious...cuz that day WILL come... i wonder what biblical citations you'll be calling upon then? oh...and by the way...the infighting among the palestinians IS directly attributable to israel; and most likely in many more ways than is already known. as for shiite and sunni?; has similar conflict not also occured among "christians"...and even "jews"? remember one thing, maria... "ain't no man righteous; no not one" bobdylan~1981

It's been a real bad day. Chef Erekat insisted he was a celebrity chef who wanted nothing to do with commoners like us. He had a hissy fit and walked out on me to cook up a storm for celebs like Condi and Olmert.This was a serious blow, but I was quite prepared to take over the kitchen myself until PETA started picketing out front. They claimed crows are second cousins twice removed from the endangered 3- legged Hoot owl. Did you organize this Dana ? PETA went on to loot my freezers that I had stocked full of crow, leaving me with basically an empty larder when the heavy hitter antisemites showed up ( Click, Durson, MA etc). I offered them the only thing I had left - the humble pies that escaped the PETA raid, but they turned their noses up at this prospect. As I knew they would. Then things got really ugly when the state and local authorities shut my diner down for hiring an illegal alien ( my chef) and various zoning ordinance infractions ( too numerous to cite). contd

Cipora is right of course. We are here to discuss our future and these people are only here to hope for our downfall. Why should we bother to talk to them or argue with them the exact date and time when disaster should befall us and our neighbours? Talk to those who care or genuinely have grievances or want information. Ill-wishers have no place here.

Some people think that changing the colour of their hats makes their faces unrecognisable. But I'd recognise that old bluffer anywhere.

not so much the religions themselves or the God they worship; but the "mortal" men who CLAIM to administer them God's name ARE greedy for power over the soul because it widens the scope of THEIR ability to influence belief in THEIR dogma...and it leads to conflict...even between different dogmas housed under the same religion. and it all boils down to "POWER"... religion is probably the single most powerful motivator behind most of the crimes against humanity that have ever taken place... which in case you haven't noticed...continues even today.

The Israelis have leadership that favors the continuation of an apartheid dictatorship; how much lasting power or intelligence does that have?

"My motivation? 1. I hate to see the cruel and unjust treatment of the Palestinians by Israel."(Boycott) And how would you react if your people would be subjected to constant terrorism for nearly 100 years? First because they wanted to prevent your people to achieve self determination and subsequently because they wantted to destroy your country? I am sure that you are aware that was their modus operandi even before OCCUPATION and the SETTLEMENTS. And Boycott, a lot of Israelis died because of their aggression. About 1% of Israelis died in the 1948 war of independence alone! That would be equivalent to 3 million American deaths for a war that the Jews didn't want but were forced to fight. And things didn't improve subsequently. So how would you react to that if it was your people who would be subjected to such aggression?

No problems with a Palestinian state have you? Not even with the Islamic Republic of Palestine from the river to the sea as ennunciated by the elected govenment of Palestine Hamas. Yes Johnboy you do have a serious problem,selective vision with giant blind spots.

Do Jews have to pander to bigotts for the right to be treated equally? Does acknowledging their bigottry help them?

But G-D is playing a cruel joke on the Jewish people. Again. It is worse when you realize it could even be worse. Peres.

Fed-Up, thank you for your interesting post, but really today was such a newsworthy day with so much happening with the Palestinian perspectives, Olmert's talk with Yesha Council, Rice's talk with GA, ...and now that the core issues will be part of declaration, you really think that I'm lonely for words without Tosefta's presence (also up until now I see Danite has been away - probably was fed-up & needed a break). Believe me, I've got an opinion on most items and must convince myself not to post. You think I'm "always prim and proper"? But I'm Israeli-born, so I try to be as gracious as I can realistically be!

TR: "I have news for you Dana: Israel IS a secular democratic state." I have news for you, Tim; Israel is a democratic state, but it is not a secular state. Israeli CITIZENSHIP is based on universal sufferage, so everyone in Israel is entitled to participate in the body politic. But Israeli NATIONALITY is not. In fact, according to the Basic Laws there isn't even such a thing *AS* Israeli nationality. There is: "Jewish nationality" "Druze nationality" "Muslim nationality" Those with "Jewish nationality" have rights that "other nationalities" do not have. And who has that "Jewish nationality", Tim? It's not just "those Israeli citizens who are Jewish", but EVERY JEW EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD. So Israeli Jews and Disapora Jews alike have superior rights to "other nationalities" under the Basic Laws, even if when those "other nationalities" are Israelis and those Diaspora Jews are not. That's not secularism, Tim. Not by a long shot.

"how many jews in erekat`s land" you ask..."(S) "almost 500,000 from what I read. That`;s a lot of jews (by my count it`s 15-25% depending on whether you include Gaza). I`d say it`s a sizeable minority - on par with the Arab one in israel. I see a major civil rights battle looming....."(Dana) I thought it was more like 200,000 but let's not quibble. Your comment about civil war is interesting. I ask you: Why should moderate Israelis risk a civil war by evicting the settlers so long as your Pal Arabs don't exhibit a single shred of willingness to compromise and stop their violence against Israeli civilians?! And I am telling you on the other hand, that things would be different if your Pal Arabs would stop trying to solve EVERYTHING by threats and VIOLENCE and try compromise instead. Yes, I know it's just my judgement but it's based on past history. Egypt got ALL of it's lands back when Sadat offered genuine peace..

Why, I believe his "problem" is that Olmert keeps shifting the goalposts. Ever since "Israel" was proclaimed the Israelis have insisted that the Pals recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist. Fine, I would too. The Pals did that in 1993. They keep doing that every time the Israelis so insist, and the Israelis are so very insistant, PETER. NOW he finds that Olmert is saying "THAT IS NOT ENOUGH!". NOW he finds that Olmert is saying "YOU MUST RECOGNIZE ISRAEL AS A JEWISH STATE!". And Erekat is telling Olmert that he isn't obliged to, and he isn't going to. Erekat is right; how the current regime in Israel decides to view itself is an issue for the Israelis. It is nothing to do with the Pals. The Pals have to recognize the State of Israel. They have. The Pals have to recognize Olmert's govt as the legitimate govt of Israel. They have. They are NOT required to recognize the immutability of that current regime, and they won't.

I believe you may have misconstrued what I said.

Tim hello She will persist in her vision no matter how well balanced your responses are,she just wriggles under it.I have a felling she is a hard line Socialist.But matter not.In the present subject why does she digress when her "propre amour" are the pals,and she still jumps in without any thought process to give her credence.You Tim(like Cipora) have much patience to be able and deal with her kind.However,I now find Cipora is acting with less patience and I applaud her for it.For what is the point in long responses where a line ior two suffices.Anyway Tim the best of luck,and don't be intimidated by dana,which I think you most certainly will not... Always a pleasure to see you here.

:)

Even with the pronouncements of Erakat and Hamas you still are harping on the need for a Palestinian State.. YOU ARE TRULY WEIRD.

I never said socialist; I said leftist. That is a more ambiguous term than socialist. However, I do agree that some services should be nationalized or socialized, in order to guarantee equal distribution, and I believe in the need for strong government, not this market-driven nonsense that Klaudia tosses about.

"Why not declare israel secular state regardless of what the pals want? now there`d be a coup!"(Dana) I have news for you Dana: Israel IS a secular democratic state. However, unlike the USA and some other western countries, Israel has a multi party system (not just two main parties that rule alternately). This has the unfortunate side effect of allowing minority parties, such as religious parties, to wield undue influence because they have the balance of power. But rest assured Dana, about 70% to 80% of Israelis ARE secular. Having said that, as a secular Jew, I don't believe that everything to do with religion, or the religious people, are all bad. Sure, there are many things that we disagree with them but it does not mean that they are all villains or that all their ideas are bad. "PS what the heck happened with BB`s abortion/holocaust column? was about to post my answer to you yesterday when it went poof!"(Dana) I think it's back now.

seriously here, smadar. he's just playing cards & creating pressures before the big show starts in a few days from now. he's too clever (& too well educated, i'm sure)to not to know what the phrase "jewish state" means etc. this is the same game arafat played when first negotiating for who knows how many days at c. david (plus whateve time it took to prepare that summit), only to pull the pal. right of return card out of his sleeve at the very end. or when he to clinton's astonishment plain denied the historic existence of the jewish temple in jerusalem. the pals are not so dumm (i'm thinking of primarily fatah plus a few independent people) as to not knowing exactly what the minimum criteria are on the isr. side in order to make any headway in negotiations at all. ie whatever some of them may believe personally on the subject of jewish history, ethnicity etc (which in those cases amounts to just pure hypocracy, of course, taking into acc. where they as pals stand on similar issues

They have agreed to bypass the first step of the Peace Plan. :)

Khaled Are you for real?because if you are,then with a name like that you are one ina million. The onlly Khaled who woulf honestly speak as you do,would be Khaled abu Thomaeh(hope I spelt the name correctly)Nevertheless your response is quite in keeping with the sentiment of saying"Israel is a Jewish Nation".You then expressed the reason why the Palestinians don't deserve a state nor to even live next door to Israel. Well,what can I say...I happen to agree with you providing you are serious......truth is just that.

Chaim Something and now I know.I was too busy praising Bradley, about his article,then I lost the thread and now that you mention it,BINGO!Quite true in what you say.I have yet to meet any Jewish Israelis who accept a Palestinian state.They are already surrounded by many Arab villages(one of my family who live in Karkur)is witness to this phenomenon...Silly me.I did miss that part because I "cut and pasted" part of Brad's article to enable me to respond accordingly. What a load of piffle....Now haaretz put this our for Chaim ....

dana, - (please don't hate me for this) you really don't know what you're dealing w/here. whatever the controversies say, "jewish" is primarily an ethnic category, ask any modern anthropologist worth his name (he doesn't have to be an israeli one, just don't look up a faculty where all the staff should happen to be palestinian). it's the only category - the one of ethnicity that covers the jewish people as a whole, & so much more so if you think of the last 2 centuries /so of their history. basically there's no difference here between them & any other ethnicity. look at any european one f. ex. - for a good comparison. that's why a national state makes sense. but there is a rub, a difference & it's probably the reason why it makes people stumble. in this case the religion made the ethnicity /the people, whichever way you choose to see this. they didn't take a religion, as say a latino ethnic group might have. the religion made them instead, you could even say they are a religion.

I didnt realise you were a socialist????

All that talk and critisizing Bradley and at the end,the TRUTH surfaces... Go away with you Oximoronic man,that I shall be justified in calling you.I hasten to add you are "A MORON AND A FIRST CLASS ONE"Zionism is not dead,but very much alive and kicking.Thank you. And by Gum you are a ONE!! Ms.Kohn replied in her polite way.I can't oblige you in the same manner,because the type of responses we get here(like yours)makes me want to puke!Especially with someone who tries to pontificate what we should call our country,one way or another,is NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS AND Leave Bradley to do his work,and stop interfering with it. Oh yes,from Londonistan no less.Just made sure I was't addressing one of our own....IDIOT

I made a mistake.He acts like he supposed to ack in his envierment. But the mentality of Arabs will not change.

If the Pals don;t like to live in or near a Jewish State they can go to Jordan, I'll pay for their one way ticket.They are all squotters on the land having arrived after Jews drained the malaria swamps, to live off our backs,they came from Syria, Egypt, Sudan, Lebanon & Saudia.Just send them back, I'll pay their transportation.

Why do you think anybody even cares what you think??